Need for discriminating between diagnostic and screening efficacy to estimate a biomarker based on case control and cohort studies

Abstract This study proposes the comprehensive index of biomarker (CIB), based on the consistency of a biomarker in case control (Youden index, J) and cohort studies (Crc), to evaluate biomarker efficacy. CIB was calculated as the mean of J and Crc. Analysis of the effect of sensitivity and specific...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal:	Liu Hui
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Nature Portfolio 2021
Materias:	Medicine R Science Q
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/3a69fbe12ad4413f9715a65a1df8e2bd
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:3a69fbe12ad4413f9715a65a1df8e2bd
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:3a69fbe12ad4413f9715a65a1df8e2bd2021-11-21T12:19:07ZNeed for discriminating between diagnostic and screening efficacy to estimate a biomarker based on case control and cohort studies10.1038/s41598-021-01904-02045-2322https://doaj.org/article/3a69fbe12ad4413f9715a65a1df8e2bd2021-11-01T00:00:00Zhttps://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-01904-0https://doaj.org/toc/2045-2322Abstract This study proposes the comprehensive index of biomarker (CIB), based on the consistency of a biomarker in case control (Youden index, J) and cohort studies (Crc), to evaluate biomarker efficacy. CIB was calculated as the mean of J and Crc. Analysis of the effect of sensitivity and specificity on CIB and ROC analysis of CIB were performed in simulated and actual datasets. J and CIB had similar values for high-probability events (say probability was 0.50), but there was a significant difference between J and CIB for low-probability events (say probability was 0.05). Therefore, as the subjects considered for diagnosis are usually symptomatic, the occurrence of a disease can be assumed to be a high-probability event. In contrast, as the subjects considered in screening for a disease are usually healthy and asymptomatic, the occurrence of a disease is assumed to be a low-probability event. Although J is the common index used to evaluate the diagnostic effectiveness, unfortunately, the J value is significantly larger than CIB value in a low-probability event, showing overestimation for screening purpose. CIB could have more potential than J for determining the screening efficacy of a biomarker. The efficacy of a biomarker could differ for diagnostic, screening, predictive, and prognostic purposes, and it would be better to evaluate the efficacy of biomarkers for specific systems or contexts.Liu HuiNature PortfolioarticleMedicineRScienceQENScientific Reports, Vol 11, Iss 1, Pp 1-7 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Medicine R Science Q
spellingShingle	Medicine R Science Q Liu Hui Need for discriminating between diagnostic and screening efficacy to estimate a biomarker based on case control and cohort studies
description	Abstract This study proposes the comprehensive index of biomarker (CIB), based on the consistency of a biomarker in case control (Youden index, J) and cohort studies (Crc), to evaluate biomarker efficacy. CIB was calculated as the mean of J and Crc. Analysis of the effect of sensitivity and specificity on CIB and ROC analysis of CIB were performed in simulated and actual datasets. J and CIB had similar values for high-probability events (say probability was 0.50), but there was a significant difference between J and CIB for low-probability events (say probability was 0.05). Therefore, as the subjects considered for diagnosis are usually symptomatic, the occurrence of a disease can be assumed to be a high-probability event. In contrast, as the subjects considered in screening for a disease are usually healthy and asymptomatic, the occurrence of a disease is assumed to be a low-probability event. Although J is the common index used to evaluate the diagnostic effectiveness, unfortunately, the J value is significantly larger than CIB value in a low-probability event, showing overestimation for screening purpose. CIB could have more potential than J for determining the screening efficacy of a biomarker. The efficacy of a biomarker could differ for diagnostic, screening, predictive, and prognostic purposes, and it would be better to evaluate the efficacy of biomarkers for specific systems or contexts.
format	article
author	Liu Hui
author_facet	Liu Hui
author_sort	Liu Hui
title	Need for discriminating between diagnostic and screening efficacy to estimate a biomarker based on case control and cohort studies
title_short	Need for discriminating between diagnostic and screening efficacy to estimate a biomarker based on case control and cohort studies
title_full	Need for discriminating between diagnostic and screening efficacy to estimate a biomarker based on case control and cohort studies
title_fullStr	Need for discriminating between diagnostic and screening efficacy to estimate a biomarker based on case control and cohort studies
title_full_unstemmed	Need for discriminating between diagnostic and screening efficacy to estimate a biomarker based on case control and cohort studies
title_sort	need for discriminating between diagnostic and screening efficacy to estimate a biomarker based on case control and cohort studies
publisher	Nature Portfolio
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/3a69fbe12ad4413f9715a65a1df8e2bd
work_keys_str_mv	AT liuhui needfordiscriminatingbetweendiagnosticandscreeningefficacytoestimateabiomarkerbasedoncasecontrolandcohortstudies
_version_	1718419057397465088

Need for discriminating between diagnostic and screening efficacy to estimate a biomarker based on case control and cohort studies

Ejemplares similares