Goldman Noreen, Glei Dana A
Office of Population Research, Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affair, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ.
Center for Population and Health, Georgetown University, Washington, D.C..
Ann Epidemiol. 2015 Dec;25(12):901-6.e1-4. doi: 10.1016/j.annepidem.2015.08.008. Epub 2015 Aug 29.
In light of widespread interest in the prognostic value of biomarkers, we apply three discrimination measures to evaluate the incremental value of biomarkers--beyond self-reported measures--for predicting all-cause mortality. We assess whether all three measures--area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve, continuous net reclassification improvement, and integrated discrimination improvement--lead to the same conclusions.
We use longitudinal data from a nationally representative sample of older Taiwanese (n = 639, aged 54 or older in 2000, examined in 2000 and 2006, with mortality follow-up through 2011). We estimate age-specific mortality using a Gompertz hazard model.
The broad conclusions are consistent across the three discrimination measures and support the inclusion of biomarkers, particularly inflammatory markers, in household surveys. Although the rank ordering of individual biomarkers varies across discrimination measures, the following is true for all three: interleukin-6 is the strongest predictor, the other three inflammatory markers make the top 10, and homocysteine ranks second or third.
The consistency of most of our findings across metrics should provide comfort to researchers using discrimination measures to evaluate the prognostic value of biomarkers. However, because the degree of consistency varies with the level of detail inherent in the research question, we recommend that researchers confirm results with multiple discrimination measures.
鉴于对生物标志物预后价值的广泛关注,我们应用三种判别方法来评估生物标志物(超越自我报告指标)在预测全因死亡率方面的增量价值。我们评估这三种方法——受试者工作特征曲线下面积、连续净重新分类改善和综合判别改善——是否会得出相同的结论。
我们使用来自具有全国代表性的台湾老年人样本的纵向数据(n = 639,2000年年龄在54岁及以上,于2000年和2006年接受检查,随访至2011年的死亡率)。我们使用Gompertz风险模型估计特定年龄的死亡率。
这三种判别方法得出的广泛结论是一致的,并支持在家庭调查中纳入生物标志物,特别是炎症标志物。尽管个体生物标志物的排名顺序在不同判别方法中有所不同,但对于所有三种方法来说以下情况都是正确的:白细胞介素-6是最强的预测因子,其他三种炎症标志物位列前十,且同型半胱氨酸排名第二或第三。
我们大多数研究结果在不同指标间的一致性应该会让使用判别方法评估生物标志物预后价值的研究人员感到安心。然而,由于一致性程度会因研究问题所固有的细节水平而有所不同,我们建议研究人员用多种判别方法来确认结果。