Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2018-11
Standardized and weighted time-dependent receiver operating characteristic curves to evaluate the intrinsic prognostic capacities of a marker by taking into account confounding factors
Time-dependent receiver operating characteristic curves allow to evaluate the capacity of a marker to discriminate between subjects who experience the event up to a given prognostic time from those who are free of this event. In this article, we propose an inverse probability weighting estimator of a standardized and weighted time-dependent receiver operating characteristic curve. This estimator provides a measure of the prognostic capacities by taking into account potential confounding factors. We illustrate the robustness of the estimator by a simulation-based study and its usefulness by two applications in kidney transplantation.
DruckerEKrapfenbauerK. Pitfalls and limitations in translation from biomarker discovery to clinical utility in predictive and personalised medicine. EPMA J2013; 4: 7–7.
2.
JoynerMJPanethN. Seven questions for personalized medicine. JAMA2015; 314: 999–1000.
3.
JanesHPepeMS. Adjusting for covariates in studies of diagnostic, screening, or prognostic markers: an old concept in a new setting. Am J Epidemiol2008; 168: 89–97.
4.
GerdsTACaiTSchumacherM. The performance of risk prediction models. Biom J2008; 50: 457–479.
5.
GerdsTASchumacherM. Consistent estimation of the expected Brier score in general survival models with right-censored event times. Biom J2006; 48: 1029–1040.
6.
GrafESchmoorCSauerbreiWet al.Assessment and comparison of prognostic classification schemes for survival data. Stat Med1999; 18: 2529–2545.
7.
AustinPCSteyerbergEW. Graphical assessment of internal and external calibration of logistic regression models by using loess smoothers. Stat Med2014; 33: 517–535.
8.
HarrellFELeeKLMarkDB. Multivariable prognostic models: issues in developing models, evaluating assumptions and adequacy, and measuring and reducing errors. Stat Med1996; 15: 361–387.
9.
SteyerbergEWVickersAJCookNRet al.Assessing the performance of prediction models: a framework for traditional and novel measures. Epidemiology2010; 21: 128–138.
10.
HosmerDWLemesbowS. Goodness of fit tests for the multiple logistic regression model. Comm Stat Theor Meth1980; 9: 1043–1069.
11.
PencinaMJD’AgostinoRBD’AgostinoRBet al.Evaluating the added predictive ability of a new marker: from area under the ROC curve to reclassification and beyond. Stat Med2008; 27: 157–172; discussion 207–212.
12.
XanthakisVSullivanLMVasanRSet al.Assessing the incremental predictive performance of novel biomarkers over standard predictors. Stat Med2014; 33: 2577–2584.
13.
JanesHPepeMS. Adjusting for covariate effects on classification accuracy using the covariate-adjusted receiver operating characteristic curve. Biometrika2009; 96: 371–382.
14.
PepeMSCaiT. The analysis of placement values for evaluating discriminatory measures. Biometrics2004; 60: 528–535.
15.
PepeMSLongtonG. Standardizing diagnostic markers to evaluate and compare their performance. Epidemiology2005; 16: 598–603.
16.
HeagertyPJLumleyTPepeMS. Time-dependent ROC curves for censored survival data and a diagnostic marker. Biometrics2000; 56: 337–344.
17.
HeagertyPJZhengY. Survival model predictive accuracy and ROC curves. Biometrics2005; 61: 92–105.
18.
MoskowitzCSPepeMS. Quantifying and comparing the accuracy of binary biomarkers when predicting a failure time outcome. Stat Med2004; 23: 1555–1570.
19.
SongXMaSHuangJet al.A semiparametric approach for the nonparametric transformation survival model with multiple covariates. Biostatistics2007; 8: 197–211.
20.
Rodríguez-ÁlvarezMXMeira-MachadoLAbu-AssiEet al.Nonparametric estimation of time-dependent ROC curves conditional on a continuous covariate. Stat Med2015; 35: 1090–1102.
21.
ZhengYCaiTStanfordJLet al.Semiparametric models of time-dependent predictive values of prognostic biomarkers. Biometrics2010; 66: 50–60.
22.
BlanchePDartiguesJ-FJacqmin-GaddaH. Review and comparison of ROC curve estimators for a time-dependent outcome with marker-dependent censoring. Biom J2013; 55: 687–704.
23.
UnoHCaiTTianLet al.Evaluating prediction rules for t-year survivors with censored regression models. J Am Stat Assoc2007; 102: 527–537.
24.
HungHChiangC-T. Estimation methods for time-dependent AUC models with survival data. Can J Stat2010; 38: 8–26.
25.
RosenbaumPR. Model-based direct adjustment. J Am Stat Assoc1987; 82: 387–387.
26.
RosenbaumPRRubinDB. The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika1983; 70: 41–55.
27.
CoxDR. Regression models and life-tables (with discussion). J Roy Stat Soc B1972; 34: 187–220.
28.
BreslowNE. Discussion of the paper by D. R. Cox. J Roy Stat Soc B1972; 34: 216–217.
29.
YarlagaddaSGCocaSGGargAXet al.Marked variation in the definition and diagnosis of delayed graft function: a systematic review. Nephrol Dial Transplant2008; 23: 2995–3003.
30.
TapiawalaSNTinckamKJCardellaCJet al.Delayed graft function and the risk for death with a functioning graft. J Am Soc Nephrol2010; 21: 153–161.
31.
YarlagaddaSGCocaSGFormicaRNJret al.Association between delayed graft function and allograft and patient survival: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Nephrol Dial Transplant2009; 24: 1039–1047.
32.
IrishWDIlsleyJNSchnitzlerMAet al.A risk prediction model for delayed graft function in the current era of deceased donor renal transplantation. Am J Transplant2010; 10: 2279–2286.
33.
PericoNCattaneoDSayeghMHet al.Delayed graft function in kidney transplantation. Lancet2004; 364: 1814–1827.
34.
ChapalMLe BorgneFLegendreCet al.A useful scoring system for the prediction and management of delayed graft function following kidney transplantation from cadaveric donors. Kidney Int2014; 86: 1130–1139.
35.
OpelzGDöhlerB. Multicenter analysis of kidney preservation. Transplantation2007; 83: 247–253.
36.
FoucherYDaguinPAklAet al.A clinical scoring system highly predictive of long-term kidney graft survival. Kidney Int2010; 78: 1288–1294.
37.
HariharanSMcBrideMACherikhWSet al.Post-transplant renal function in the first year predicts long-term kidney transplant survival. Kidney Int2002; 62: 311–318.
38.
NicolDMacDonaldASLawenJet al.Early prediction of renal allograft loss beyond one year. Transpl Int1993; 6: 153–157.
39.
JanesHLongtonGPepeM. Accommodating covariates in ROC analysis. Stata J2009; 9: 17–39.
40.
CombescureCPernegerTVWeberDCet al.Prognostic ROC curves: a method for representing the overall discriminative capacity of binary markers with right-censored time-to-event endpoints. Epidemiology2014; 25: 103–109.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
