The central role of receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves in evaluating tests for the early detection of cancer

Journal of the National Cancer Institute

Volumn 95, Issue 7, 2003, Pages 511-515

  Baker, Stuart G ^a  

^a NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIOLOGICAL MARKER; TUMOR MARKER;

ANALYTIC METHOD; ARTICLE; CANCER MORTALITY; CANCER SCREENING; CLINICAL STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ERROR; DIAGNOSTIC TEST; DNA MICROARRAY; EARLY DIAGNOSIS; EVALUATION; GENE EXPRESSION; HUMAN; IMAGING SYSTEM; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAMMOGRAPHY; PREVALENCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROBABILITY; PROTEOMICS; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; RATING SCALE; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; TUMOR BIOPSY; AREA UNDER THE CURVE; CLINICAL COMPETENCE; MASS SCREENING; METHODOLOGY; NEOPLASM; OBSERVER VARIATION; REVIEW; ROC CURVE; STATISTICS;

AREA UNDER CURVE; CLINICAL COMPETENCE; HUMANS; MASS SCREENING; NEOPLASMS; OBSERVER VARIATION; OLIGONUCLEOTIDE ARRAY SEQUENCE ANALYSIS; PROTEOMICS; ROC CURVE; TUMOR MARKERS, BIOLOGICAL;

EID: 0037413947     PISSN: 00278874     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/jnci/95.7.511     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Baker SG, Kramer BS, Prorok PC. Statistical issues in randomized trials of cancer screening. BMC Med Res Methodol 2002;2:11.
2. Baker SG, Kramer BS, Srivastava S. Markers for early detection of cancer statistical issues for nested case-control studies. BMC Med Res Methodol 2002;2:4.
3. Pepe MS, Etzioni R, Feng S, Potter JD, Thompson ML, Thornquist M, et al. Phases of biomarker development for early detection of cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2001;93:1054-61.
4. Esserman L, Cowley H, Eberle C, Kirkpatrick A, Chang S, Berbaum K, et al. Improving the accuracy of mammography: volume and outcome relationships. J Natl Cancer Inst 2002;94:369-75.
5. Shapiro DE. The interpretation of diagnostic tests. Stat Methods Med Res 1999;8:113-34.
6. Baker SG. Identifying combinations of cancer biomarkers for further study as triggers of early intervention. Biometrics 2000;56:1082-7.
7. Baker SG, Pinsky P. A proposed design and analysis for comparing digital and analog mammography: special ROC methods for cancer screening. J Am Stat Assoc 2001;96:421-8.
8. Christiansen CL, Wang F, Barton MB, Kreuter W, Elmore JG, Gelfand AE, et al. Predicting the cumulative risk of false-positive mammograms. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000;92:1657-66.
9. Mok SC, Chao J, Skates S, Wong K, Yiu GK, Muto MG, et al. Prostasin, a potential serum marker for ovarian cancer: identification through microarray technology. J Natl Cancer Inst 2001;93:1458-64.
10. Petricoin EF, Ardekani AM, Hitt BA, Levine PJ, Fusaro VA, Steinberg SM, et al. Use of proteomic patterns in serum to identify ovarian cancer. Lancet 2002;359:572-7.
11. Petricoin EF, Ornstein DK, Paweletz CP, Ardekani A, Hackett PS, Hitt BA, et al. Serum proteomic patterns for detection of prostate cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2002;94:1576-8.
12. Simon R, Radmacher MD, Dobbin K, McShane LM. Pitfalls in the use of DNA microarray data for diagnostic and prognostic classification. J Natl Cancer Inst 2003;95:14-8.
13. Pepe MS. Selecting differentially expressed genes from microarray experiments. Biometrics 2003;59:133-42.
14. Dudoit S, Fridlyand J, Speed TR. Comparison of discrimination methods for the classification of tumors using gene expression data. J Am Star Assoc 2002;97:77-87.
15. Radmacher MD, McShane LM, Simon R. A paradigm for class prediction using gene expression profiles. J Comput Biol 2002;9:505-11.
16. Rockhill B. Proteomic patterns in serum and identification of ovarian cancer. Lancet 2002:360:169. author reply 170-1.
17. Pearl DC. Proteomic patterns in serum and identification of ovarian cancer. Lancet 2002;360:169-70. author reply 170-1.
18. Elwood M. Proteomic patterns in serum and identification of ovarian cancer. Lancet 2002;360:170. author reply 170-1.
19. Baker SG, Tockman MS. Evaluating serial observations of precancerous lesions for further study as a trigger for early intervention. Stat Med 2002; 21:2383-90.
20. Hanley JA, McNeil BJ. The meaning and use of the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology 1982;143:29-36.
21. Thompson ML, Zucchini W. On the statistical analysis of ROC curves. Stat Med 1989;8:1127-290.
22. Halpern EJ, Albert M, Krieger AM, Metz CE, Maidment AD. Comparison of receiver operating characteristic curves on the basis of optimal operating points. Acad Radiol 1996;3:245-53.
23. Beam C, Layde PM, Sullivan DC. Variability in the interpretation of screening mammograms by US radiologists. Arch Intern Med 1996;156:209-13.
24. Wagner RF, Beiden SV, Campbell G, Metz CE, Sacks WM. Assessment of medical imaging and computer-assist systems: lessons from recent experience. Acad Radiol 2002;9:1264-77.