Search

Data integration, i.e. the use of different sources of information for data analysis, is becoming one of the most important topics in modern statistics. Especially in, but not limited to, biomedical applications, a relevant issue is the combination of low-dimensional (e.g. clinical data) and high-dimensional (e.g. molecular data such as gene expressions) data sources in a prediction model. Not only the different characteristics of the data, but also the complex correlation structure within and between the two data sources, pose challenging issues. In this paper, we investigate these issues via simulations, providing some useful insight into strategies to combine low- and high-dimensional data in a regression prediction model. In particular, we focus on the effect of the correlation structure on the results, while accounting for the influence of our specific choices in the design of the simulation study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Radiotherapy after breast conservation has become the standard of care. Prior meta-analyses on effects of radiotherapy predated availability of gene expression profiling (GEP) to assess recurrence risk and/or did not include all relevant outcomes. This analysis used GEP information with pooled individual-level data to evaluate the impact of omitting radiotherapy on recurrence and mortality.Methods: We considered trials that evaluated or administered radiotherapy after lumpectomy in women with low-risk breast cancer. Women included had undergone lumpectomy and were treated with hormonal therapy for stage I, ER+ and/or PR+, HER2- breast cancer with Oncotype scores no greater than 18. Recurrence-free interval (RFI), type of RFI (locoregional or distant), and breast cancer-specific and overall survival were compared between no radiotherapy and radiotherapy using adjusted Cox models. All statistical tests were two-sided.Results: The final sample included 1778 women from seven trials. Omission of radiotherapy was associated with an overall adjusted hazard ratio of 2.59 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.38 to 4.89, P = .003) for RFI. There was a statistically significant increase in any first locoregional recurrence (P = .001), but not distant recurrence events (P = .90), or breast cancer-specific (P = .85) or overall survival (P = .61). Five-year RFI rate was high (93.5% for no radiotherapy vs 97.9% for radiotherapy; absolute reduction = 4.4%, 95% CI = 0.7% to 8.1%, P = .03). The effects of radiotherapy varied across subgroups, with lower RFI rates for those with Oncotype scores of less than 11 (vs 11-18), older (vs younger), and ER+/PR+ status (vs other).Conclusions: Omission of radiotherapy in hormone-sensitive patients with low recurrence risk may lead to a modest increase in locoregional recurrence event rates, but does not appear to increase the rate of distant recurrence or death. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Reporting Recommendations for Tumor Marker Prognostic Studies (REMARK) were developed to address widespread deficiencies in the reporting of such studies. The REMARK checklist consists of 20 items to report for published tumor marker prognostic studies. A detailed paper was published explaining the rationale behind checklist items, providing positive examples and giving empirical evidence of the quality of reporting. REMARK provides a comprehensive overview to educate on good reporting and provide a valuable reference for the many issues to consider when designing, conducting, and analyzing tumor marker studies and prognostic studies in medicine in general. Despite support for REMARK from major cancer journals, prognostic factor research studies remain poorly reported. To encourage dissemination and uptake of REMARK, we have produced this considerably abridged version of the detailed explanatory manuscript, which may also serve as a brief guide to key issues for investigators planning tumor marker prognostic studies. To summarize the current situation, more recent papers investigating the quality of reporting and related reporting guidelines are cited, but otherwise the literature is not updated. Another important impetus for this paper is that it serves as a basis for literal translations into other languages. Translations will help to bring key information to a larger audience world-wide. Many more details can be found in the original paper. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In most epidemiologic studies and in clinical research generally, there are variables with a spike at zero, namely variables for which a proportion of individuals have zero exposure (e.g., never smokers) and among those exposed the variable has a continuous distribution. Different options exist for modeling such variables, such as categorization where the nonexposed form the reference group, or ignoring the spike by including the variable in the regression model with or without some transformation or modeling procedures. It has been shown that such situations can be analyzed by adding a binary indicator (exposed/nonexposed) to the regression model, and a method based on fractional polynomials with which to estimate a suitable functional form for the positive portion of the spike-at-zero variable distribution has been developed. In this paper, we compare different approaches using data from 3 case-control studies carried out in Germany: the Mammary Carcinoma Risk Factor Investigation (MARIE), a breast cancer study conducted in 2002-2005 (Flesch-Janys et al., IntJ Cancer. 2008;123(4):933-941); the Rhein-Neckar Larynx Study, a study of laryngeal cancer conducted in 1998-2000 (Dietz et al., Int J Cancer. 2004;108(6):907-911); and a lung cancer study conducted in 1988-1993 (Jöckel et al., Int J Epidemiol. 1998; 27(4):549-560). Strengths and limitations of different procedures are demonstrated, and some recommendations for practical use are given. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In recent years, increasing attention has been devoted to the problem of the stability of multivariable regression models, understood as the resistance of the model to small changes in the data on which it has been fitted. Resampling techniques, mainly based on the bootstrap, have been developed to address this issue. In particular, the approaches based on the idea of "inclusion frequency" consider the repeated implementation of a variable selection procedure, for example backward elimination, on several bootstrap samples. The analysis of the variables selected in each iteration provides useful information on the model stability and on the variables' importance. Recent findings, nevertheless, show possible pitfalls in the use of the bootstrap, and alternatives such as subsampling have begun to be taken into consideration in the literature. Using model selection frequencies and variable inclusion frequencies, we empirically compare these two different resampling techniques, investigating the effect of their use in selected classical model selection procedures for multivariable regression. We conduct our investigations by analyzing two real data examples and by performing a simulation study. Our results reveal some advantages in using a subsampling technique rather than the bootstrap in this context. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hundreds of ‘molecular signatures’ have been proposed in the literature to predict patient outcome in clinical settings from high-dimensional data, many of which eventually failed to get validated. Validation of such molecular research findings is thus becoming an increasingly important branch of clinical bioinformatics. Moreover, in practice well-known clinical predictors are often already available. From a statistical and bioinformatics point of view, poor attention has been given to the evaluation of the added predictive value of a molecular signature given that clinical predictors or an established index are available. This article reviews procedures that assess and validate the added predictive value of high-dimensional molecular data. It critically surveys various approaches for the construction of combined prediction models using both clinical and molecular data, for validating added predictive value based on independent data, and for assessing added predictive value using a single data set. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

In many settings with possibly non-linear influence of covariates, such as in the present application with children's respiratory health data, generalized additive models are an attractive choice. Although techniques for fitting these have been extensively investigated, there are fewer results on stability of replication, i.e. stability of fitted model components with respect to perturbations in the data. Nevertheless, this aspect is essential for judging how useful the present model is for understanding predictors of lung function. We therefore investigate existing tools for stability analysis based on bootstrap samples, such as quantities for variability and bias, for our application. Furthermore, as the focus is on models based on B-splines, knot removal techniques are available. These can help to provide more insight into the stability of local features that are fitted in bootstrap samples. We analyse the bootstrap result matrix via log-linear models. Specifically, the relationship with respect to local features between the influence functions of potential lung function predictors is investigated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite years of research and hundreds of reports on tumor markers in oncology, the number of markers that have emerged as clinically useful is pitifully small. Often, initially reported studies of a marker show great promise, but subsequent studies on the same or related markers yield inconsistent conclusions or stand in direct contradiction to the promising results. It is imperative that we attempt to understand the reasons that multiple studies of the same marker lead to differing conclusions. A variety of methodologic problems have been cited to explain these discrepancies. Unfortunately, many tumor marker studies have not been reported in a rigorous fashion, and published articles often lack sufficient information to allow adequate assessment of the quality of the study or the generalizability of study results. The development of guidelines for the reporting of tumor marker studies was a major recommendation of the National Cancer Institute-European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (NCI-EORTC) First International Meeting on Cancer Diagnostics in 2000. As for the successful CONSORT initiative for randomized trials and for the STARD statement for diagnostic studies, we suggest guidelines to provide relevant information about the study design, preplanned hypotheses, patient and specimen characteristics, assay methods, and statistical analysis methods. In addition, the guidelines suggest helpful presentations of data and important elements to include in discussions. The goal of these guidelines is to encourage transparent and complete reporting so that the relevant information will be available to others to help them to judge the usefulness of the data and understand the context in which the conclusions apply. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The number of variables in a regression model is often too large and a more parsimonious model may be preferred. Selection strategies (e.g. all-subset selection with various penalties for model complexity, or stepwise procedures) are widely used, but there are few analytical results about their properties. The problems of replication stability, model complexity, selection bias and an overoptimistic estimate of the predictive value of a model are discussed together with several proposals based on resampling methods. The methods are applied to data from a case-control study on atopic dermatitis and a clinical trial to compare two chemotherapy regimes by using a logistic regression and a Cox model. A recent proposal to use shrinkage factors to reduce the bias of parameter estimates caused by model building is extended to parameterwise shrinkage factors and is discussed as a further possibility to illustrate problems of models which are too complex. The results from the resampling approaches favour greater simplicity of the final regression model. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Comments on a meta-analysis of the tumor suppressor protein TP53 which is used as a prognostic marker for head and neck cancer. View that selective reporting biases are a major barrier to conducting meaningful meta-analyses of prognostic marker studies; Association between TP53 status and mortality; Randomized controlled trial.

The article presents a response to the creation reporting guidelines for tumor marker prognostic studies. The authors cited that there are serious differences in the quality of reporting of tumor marker studies. He wants to maintain his position that, more is better, only when the data are of good quality.