Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37884606›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2023

Application of statistical machine learning in biomarker selection.

Ritwik Vashistha, Zubdahe Noor, Shibasish Dasgupta, Jie Pu, Shibing Deng

Erratum issued Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to trial NCT02603432 (A PHASE 3, MULTICENTER, MULTINATIONAL, RANDOMIZED, OPEN-LABEL, PARALLEL-ARM STUDY OF AVELUMAB), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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.

NCT02603432 phase3completednot on this map

A phase 3, multicenter, multinational, randomized, open-label, parallel-arm study of avelumab (msb0010718c) plus best supportive care versus best supportive care alone as a maintenance treatment in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer whose disease did not progress after completion of first-line platinum-containing chemotherapy

TypeinterventionalSponsorPfizerRan2016 to 2023Enrolled700ConditionsUrothelial CancerArmsAvelumab, Best Supportive Care, Following the planned interim analysis for this study: Avelumab
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Ritwik VashisthaDepartment of Statistics and Data Sciences, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA.
Zubdahe NoorPfizer Research and Development, Pfizer Healthcare India Private Limited, Chennai, India.
Shibasish DasguptaPfizer Research and Development, Pfizer Healthcare India Private Limited, Chennai, India. shibasish.dasgupta@pfizer.com.
Jie PuPfizer Research and Development, Pfizer, New York, NY, USA.
Shibing DengPfizer Research and Development, Pfizer, New York, NY, USA.
Pfizer (United States) · USPfizer (India) · INThe University of Texas at Austin · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the recent JAVELIN Bladder 100 phase 3 trial, avelumab plus best supportive care significantly prolonged overall survival relative to best supportive care alone as first-line maintenance therapy following first-line platinum-based chemotherapy in patients with advanced urothelial cancer (aUC). Discovering biomarkers using genomic profiling to understand potential patient heterogeneity is essential to help improve patient care with precision medicine. For the JAVELIN Bladder 100 trial, it is unclear which variable selection methods can most reliably identify biomarkers to inform patient care because the dataset is characterized by high collinearity and low signal. The aim of this paper was to evaluate available selection methods and their ability to discover prognostic and predictive biomarkers in patients with aUC receiving first-line maintenance therapy. A simulation study evaluated the performance of popular variable selection approaches for high-dimensional data, including penalized regression models, random survival forests, and Bayesian variable selection methods. For Bayesian variable selection methods, a modified Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC) thresholding rule was proposed in addition to the traditional BIC thresholding rule. These methods were applied to the JAVELIN Bladder 100 dataset to investigate potential biomarkers associated with survival benefit. Results from the simulations demonstrated the strengths and limitations of the different methods. The variable selection methods demonstrated low false discovery rates under different conditions. However, their performance declined in the presence of high collinearity. Using the JAVELIN Bladder 100 data, we identified some potentially significant biomarkers across multiple models. Several lasso-related methods were able to identify potentially biologically meaningful variables in the trial. Some variable selection methods (such as stochastic search variable selection and random survival forest) may not be well suited to this type of data due to the presence of extreme collinearity and low signal. Future research should explore novel variable selection methods that may be more suitable for identifying prognostic and predictive biomarkers in this population.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02603432.

Indexed as

Machine LearningBayes TheoremBiomarkersClinical Trials, Phase III as TopicComputer SimulationHumansPrognosisBiomarkers

Identifiers

PMID37884606
PMCPMC10603146
OpenAlexW4387958527

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.