Rafael Paez, Dianna J Rowe, Stephen A Deppen, Eric L Grogan, Alexander Kaizer, Darryl J Bornhop, Amanda K Kussrow, Anna E Barón, Fabien Maldonado, Michael N Kammer
{"title":"利用干预概率曲线 (IPC) 评估生物标记物的临床效用。","authors":"Rafael Paez, Dianna J Rowe, Stephen A Deppen, Eric L Grogan, Alexander Kaizer, Darryl J Bornhop, Amanda K Kussrow, Anna E Barón, Fabien Maldonado, Michael N Kammer","doi":"10.3233/CBM-230054","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Assessing the clinical utility of biomarkers is a critical step before clinical implementation. The reclassification of patients across clinically relevant subgroups is considered one of the best methods to estimate clinical utility. However, there are important limitations with this methodology. We recently proposed the intervention probability curve (IPC) which models the likelihood that a provider will choose an intervention as a continuous function of the probability, or risk, of disease.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess the potential impact of a new biomarker for lung cancer using the IPC.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The IPC derived from the National Lung Screening Trial was used to assess the potential clinical utility of a biomarker for suspected lung cancer. The summary statistics of the change in likelihood of intervention over the population can be interpreted as the expected clinical impact of the added biomarker.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The IPC analysis of the novel biomarker estimated that 8% of the benign nodules could avoid an invasive procedure while the cancer nodules would largely remain unchanged (0.1%). We showed the benefits of this approach compared to traditional reclassification methods based on thresholds.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The IPC methodology can be a valuable tool for assessing biomarkers prior to clinical implementation.</p>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11055936/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessing the clinical utility of biomarkers using the intervention probability curve (IPC).\",\"authors\":\"Rafael Paez, Dianna J Rowe, Stephen A Deppen, Eric L Grogan, Alexander Kaizer, Darryl J Bornhop, Amanda K Kussrow, Anna E Barón, Fabien Maldonado, Michael N Kammer\",\"doi\":\"10.3233/CBM-230054\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Assessing the clinical utility of biomarkers is a critical step before clinical implementation. The reclassification of patients across clinically relevant subgroups is considered one of the best methods to estimate clinical utility. However, there are important limitations with this methodology. We recently proposed the intervention probability curve (IPC) which models the likelihood that a provider will choose an intervention as a continuous function of the probability, or risk, of disease.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess the potential impact of a new biomarker for lung cancer using the IPC.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The IPC derived from the National Lung Screening Trial was used to assess the potential clinical utility of a biomarker for suspected lung cancer. The summary statistics of the change in likelihood of intervention over the population can be interpreted as the expected clinical impact of the added biomarker.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The IPC analysis of the novel biomarker estimated that 8% of the benign nodules could avoid an invasive procedure while the cancer nodules would largely remain unchanged (0.1%). We showed the benefits of this approach compared to traditional reclassification methods based on thresholds.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The IPC methodology can be a valuable tool for assessing biomarkers prior to clinical implementation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":2,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11055936/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3233/CBM-230054\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3233/CBM-230054","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Assessing the clinical utility of biomarkers using the intervention probability curve (IPC).
Background: Assessing the clinical utility of biomarkers is a critical step before clinical implementation. The reclassification of patients across clinically relevant subgroups is considered one of the best methods to estimate clinical utility. However, there are important limitations with this methodology. We recently proposed the intervention probability curve (IPC) which models the likelihood that a provider will choose an intervention as a continuous function of the probability, or risk, of disease.
Objective: To assess the potential impact of a new biomarker for lung cancer using the IPC.
Methods: The IPC derived from the National Lung Screening Trial was used to assess the potential clinical utility of a biomarker for suspected lung cancer. The summary statistics of the change in likelihood of intervention over the population can be interpreted as the expected clinical impact of the added biomarker.
Results: The IPC analysis of the novel biomarker estimated that 8% of the benign nodules could avoid an invasive procedure while the cancer nodules would largely remain unchanged (0.1%). We showed the benefits of this approach compared to traditional reclassification methods based on thresholds.
Conclusions: The IPC methodology can be a valuable tool for assessing biomarkers prior to clinical implementation.