A note on the evaluation of novel biomarkers: do not rely on integrated discrimination improvement and net reclassification index

被引:132
作者
Hilden, Jorgen [1 ]
Gerds, Thomas A. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Copenhagen, Dept Biostat, DK-1168 Copenhagen, Denmark
关键词
biomarker; IDI; NRI; prediction; prognostic models; proper scoring rules; PROBABILITIES; PERFORMANCE; MARKER;
D O I
10.1002/sim.5804
中图分类号
Q [生物科学];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
The 'integrated discrimination improvement' (IDI) and the 'net reclassification index' (NRI) are statistics proposed as measures of the incremental prognostic impact that a new biomarker will have when added to an existing prediction model for a binary outcome. By design, both measures were meant to be intuitively appropriate, and the IDI and NRI formulae do look intuitively plausible. Both have become increasingly popular. We shall argue, however, that their use is not always safe. If IDI and NRI are used to measure gain in prediction performance, then poorly calibrated models may appear advantageous, and in a simulation study, even the model that actually generates the data (and hence is the best possible model) can be improved on without adding measured information. We illustrate these shortcomings in actual cancer data as well as by Monte Carlo simulations. In these examples, we contrast IDI and NRI with the area under ROC and the Brier score. Unlike IDI and NRI, these traditional measures have the characteristic that prognostic performance cannot be accidentally or deliberately inflated. Copyright (C) 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
引用
收藏
页码:3405 / 3414
页数:10
相关论文
共 19 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2003, The Statistical Evaluation of Medical Tests for Classification and Prediction
[2]  
[Anonymous], 1984, OLSHEN STONE CLASSIF, DOI 10.2307/2530946
[3]   Clinically Relevant Measures of Fit? A Note of Caution [J].
Cook, Nancy R. .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2012, 176 (06) :488-491
[4]   Assessing the Incremental Role of Novel and Emerging Risk Factors [J].
Cook N.R. .
Current Cardiovascular Risk Reports, 2010, 4 (2) :112-119
[5]   Strictly proper scoring rules, prediction, and estimation [J].
Gneiting, Tilmann ;
Raftery, Adrian E. .
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN STATISTICAL ASSOCIATION, 2007, 102 (477) :359-378
[6]  
Harrell F.E. J., 2012, rms: Regression Modeling Strategies
[7]   EVALUATING THE YIELD OF MEDICAL TESTS [J].
HARRELL, FE ;
CALIFF, RM ;
PRYOR, DB ;
LEE, KL ;
ROSATI, RA .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1982, 247 (18) :2543-2546
[8]  
Harrell FE, 1996, STAT MED, V15, P361, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19960229)15:4<361::AID-SIM168>3.0.CO
[9]  
2-4
[10]  
HILDEN J, 1978, METHOD INFORM MED, V17, P238