Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32424421›Full record

Trial reportBiostatistics (Oxford, England)2022

Evaluating biomarkers for treatment selection from reproducibility studies.

Xiao Song, Kevin K Dobbin

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Biostatistics (Oxford, England), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Xiao SongDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, College of Public Health, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602, USA.
Kevin K DobbinDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, College of Public Health, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602, USA.

Funding

Predictive cancer biomarkers: Design and analysis of reproducibility studiesR21CA201207 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA · PI DOBBIN, KEVIN K, SONG, XIAO · 2016 to 2017
$359k
Statistical Methods for Evaluating Longitudinal Biomarkers in Treatment Selection and Diagnostic TestsR43GM134768 · NIGMS · DATA NUMERICA INSTITUTE, INC. · PI CHAO, EDWARD C · 2019 to 2019
$254k
NCI NIH HHS R21 CA201207NIGMS NIH HHS R43 GM134768
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We consider evaluating new or more accurately measured predictive biomarkers for treatment selection based on a previous clinical trial involving standard biomarkers. Instead of rerunning the clinical trial with the new biomarkers, we propose a more efficient approach which requires only either conducting a reproducibility study in which the new biomarkers and standard biomarkers are both measured on a set of patient samples, or adopting replicated measures of the error-contaminated standard biomarkers in the original study. This approach is easier to conduct and much less expensive than studies that require new samples from patients randomized to the intervention. In addition, it makes it possible to perform the estimation of the clinical performance quickly, since there will be no requirement to wait for events to occur as would be the case with prospective validation. The treatment selection is assessed via a working model, but the proposed estimator of the mean restricted lifetime is valid even if the working model is misspecified. The proposed approach is assessed through simulation studies and applied to a cancer study.

Indexed as

Research DesignBiomarkersComputer SimulationHumansReproducibility of ResultsBiomarkersConditional scoreMeasurement errorPredictive biomarkerSIMEXSurvival

Identifiers

PMID32424421
PMCPMC8974242

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.