Methods for Assessing Improvement in Specificity When a Biomarker is Combined With a Standard Screening Test

被引:14
作者
Shaw, Pamela A. [1 ]
Pepe, Margaret S. [2 ]
Alonzo, Todd A. [3 ]
Etzioni, Ruth [2 ]
机构
[1] NIAID, Biostat Res Branch, Bethesda, MD 20892 USA
[2] Fred Hutchinson Canc Res Ctr, Div Publ Hlth Sci, Seattle, WA 98109 USA
[3] Univ So Calif, Dept Biostat, Keck Sch Med, Arcadia, CA 91006 USA
来源
STATISTICS IN BIOPHARMACEUTICAL RESEARCH | 2009年 / 1卷 / 01期
关键词
Diagnostic tests; Relative accuracy; ROC curve; Specificity; Study design;
D O I
10.1198/sbr.2009.0002
中图分类号
Q [生物科学];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
Biomarkers that can be used in combination with established screening tests to reduce false positive rates are in considerable demand. In this article, we present methods for evaluating the diagnostic performance of combination tests that require positivity on a biomarker test in addition to a standard screening test. These methods rely on relative true-and false-positive rates to measure the loss in sensitivity and gain in specificity associated with the combination relative to the standard test. Inference about the relative rates follows from noting their interpretation as conditional probabilities. These methods are extended to evaluate combinations with continuous biomarker tests by introducing a new statistical entity, the relative receiver operating characteristic (rROC) curve. The rROC curve plots the relative true positive rate versus the relative false positive rate as the biomarker threshold for positivity varies. Inference can be made by applying existing ROC methodology. We illustrate the methods with two examples: a breast cancer biomarker study proposed by the Early Detection Research Network (EDRN) and a prostate cancer case-control study examining the ability of free prostate-specific antigen (PSA) to improve the specificity of the standard PSA test.
引用
收藏
页码:18 / 25
页数:8
相关论文
共 26 条
  • [1] [Anonymous], 1994, An introduction to the bootstrap: CRC press
  • [2] [Anonymous], STAT STAT SOFTW REL
  • [3] [Anonymous], 2006, SEER CANC STAT REV 1
  • [4] Prostate-specific antigen: Current status
    Brawer, MK
    [J]. CA-A CANCER JOURNAL FOR CLINICIANS, 1999, 49 (05) : 264 - 281
  • [5] Use of the percentage of free prostate-specific antigen to enhance differentiation of prostate cancer from benign prostatic disease - A prospective multicenter clinical trial
    Catalona, WJ
    Partin, AW
    Slawin, KM
    Brawer, MK
    Flanigan, RC
    Patel, A
    Richie, JP
    deKernion, JB
    Walsh, PC
    Scardino, PT
    Lange, PH
    Subong, ENP
    Parson, RE
    Gasior, GH
    Loveland, KG
    Southwick, PC
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1998, 279 (19): : 1542 - 1547
  • [6] CATALONA WJ, 1995, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V274, P1214
  • [7] Comparison of the accuracy of two tests with a confirmatory procedure limited to positive results
    Cheng, H
    Macaluso, M
    [J]. EPIDEMIOLOGY, 1997, 8 (01) : 104 - 106
  • [8] MAXIMUM-LIKELIHOOD ESTIMATION OF PARAMETERS OF SIGNAL-DETECTION THEORY AND DETERMINATION OF CONFIDENCE INTERVALS - RATING-METHOD DATA
    DORFMAN, DD
    ALF, E
    [J]. JOURNAL OF MATHEMATICAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1969, 6 (03) : 487 - &
  • [9] Ten-year risk of false positive screening mammograms and clinical breast examinations
    Elmore, G
    Barton, MB
    Moceri, VM
    Polk, S
    Arena, PJ
    Fletcher, SW
    [J]. NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 1998, 338 (16) : 1089 - 1096
  • [10] Strategies combining total and percent free prostate specific antigen for detecting prostate cancer: A prospective evaluation
    Gann, PH
    Ma, J
    Catalona, WJ
    Stampfer, MJ
    [J]. JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2002, 167 (06) : 2427 - 2434