Altman Douglas G, Riley Richard D
Cancer Research UK Medical Statistics Group, Centre for Statistics in Medicine, Wolfson College, Oxford, UK.
Nat Clin Pract Oncol. 2005 Sep;2(9):466-72. doi: 10.1038/ncponc0287.
Prognostic markers can help to identify patients at different degrees of risk for specific outcomes, facilitate treatment choice, and aid patient counseling. Compared with other research designs, prognostic studies have been relatively neglected in the broad efforts to improve the quality of medical research, despite their ubiquity. Large protocol-driven, prospective studies are the ideal, with clear, unbiased reporting of the methods used and the results obtained. Unfortunately, published prognostic studies rarely meet such standards, and in this article we discuss their main problems and how they can be improved. In particular, an evidence-based approach to prognostic markers is required, as it is usually difficult to ascertain the benefit of a marker from single studies and a clear view is only likely to emerge from looking across multiple studies. Current systematic reviews and meta-analyses often fail to provide clear evidence-based answers, and rather only draw attention to the paucity of good-quality evidence. Prospectively planned pooled analyses of high-quality studies, along with general availability of individual patient data and adherence to reporting guidelines, would help alleviate many of these problems.
预后标志物有助于识别具有不同特定结局风险程度的患者,促进治疗选择,并辅助患者咨询。尽管预后研究普遍存在,但与其他研究设计相比,在提高医学研究质量的广泛努力中,预后研究相对受到忽视。大型方案驱动的前瞻性研究是理想选择,需清晰、无偏地报告所使用的方法和获得的结果。不幸的是,已发表的预后研究很少达到这些标准,在本文中,我们将讨论它们的主要问题以及如何加以改进。特别是,需要一种基于证据的方法来研究预后标志物,因为通常很难从单个研究中确定标志物的益处,只有通过综合多项研究才能形成清晰的认识。当前的系统评价和荟萃分析往往无法提供基于证据的明确答案,而只是凸显了高质量证据的匮乏。对高质量研究进行前瞻性计划的汇总分析,以及个人患者数据的普遍可得性和对报告指南的遵循,将有助于缓解许多此类问题。