Cargando…

Reporting of prognostic markers: current problems and development of guidelines for evidence-based practice in the future

Prognostic markers help to stratify patients for treatment by identifying patients with different risks of outcome (e.g. recurrence of disease), and are important tools in the management of cancer and many other diseases. Systematic review and meta-analytical approaches to identifying the most valua...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Riley, R D, Abrams, K R, Sutton, A J, Lambert, P C, Jones, D R, Heney, D, Burchill, S A
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group 2003
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2747576/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12698183
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6600886
_version_ 1782172112363978752
author Riley, R D
Abrams, K R
Sutton, A J
Lambert, P C
Jones, D R
Heney, D
Burchill, S A
author_facet Riley, R D
Abrams, K R
Sutton, A J
Lambert, P C
Jones, D R
Heney, D
Burchill, S A
author_sort Riley, R D
collection PubMed
description Prognostic markers help to stratify patients for treatment by identifying patients with different risks of outcome (e.g. recurrence of disease), and are important tools in the management of cancer and many other diseases. Systematic review and meta-analytical approaches to identifying the most valuable prognostic markers are needed because (sometimes conflicting) evidence relating to markers is often published across a number of studies. To investigate the practicality of this approach, an empirical investigation of a systematic review of tumour markers for neuroblastoma was performed; 260 studies of prognostic markers were identified, which considered 130 different markers. The reporting of these studies was often inadequate, in terms of both statistical analysis and presentation, and there was considerable heterogeneity for many important clinical/statistical factors. These problems restricted both the extraction of data and the meta-analysis of results from the primary studies, limiting feasibility of the evidence-based approach. Guidelines for reporting the results of primary prognostic marker studies in cancer, and other diseases, are given in order to facilitate both the interpretation of individual studies and the undertaking of systematic reviews, meta-analysis and, ultimately, evidence-based practice. General availability of full individual patient data is a necessary step forward and would overcome the majority of problems encountered, including poorly reported summary statistics and variability in cutoff level, outcome assessed and adjustment factors used. It would also limit the problem of reporting bias, although publication bias will remain a concern until studies are prospectively registered. Such changes in practice would help important evidence-based reviews to be conducted in order to establish the most appropriate prognostic markers for clinical use, which should ultimately improve patient care.
format Text
id pubmed-2747576
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2003
publisher Nature Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-27475762009-09-21 Reporting of prognostic markers: current problems and development of guidelines for evidence-based practice in the future Riley, R D Abrams, K R Sutton, A J Lambert, P C Jones, D R Heney, D Burchill, S A Br J Cancer Clinical Prognostic markers help to stratify patients for treatment by identifying patients with different risks of outcome (e.g. recurrence of disease), and are important tools in the management of cancer and many other diseases. Systematic review and meta-analytical approaches to identifying the most valuable prognostic markers are needed because (sometimes conflicting) evidence relating to markers is often published across a number of studies. To investigate the practicality of this approach, an empirical investigation of a systematic review of tumour markers for neuroblastoma was performed; 260 studies of prognostic markers were identified, which considered 130 different markers. The reporting of these studies was often inadequate, in terms of both statistical analysis and presentation, and there was considerable heterogeneity for many important clinical/statistical factors. These problems restricted both the extraction of data and the meta-analysis of results from the primary studies, limiting feasibility of the evidence-based approach. Guidelines for reporting the results of primary prognostic marker studies in cancer, and other diseases, are given in order to facilitate both the interpretation of individual studies and the undertaking of systematic reviews, meta-analysis and, ultimately, evidence-based practice. General availability of full individual patient data is a necessary step forward and would overcome the majority of problems encountered, including poorly reported summary statistics and variability in cutoff level, outcome assessed and adjustment factors used. It would also limit the problem of reporting bias, although publication bias will remain a concern until studies are prospectively registered. Such changes in practice would help important evidence-based reviews to be conducted in order to establish the most appropriate prognostic markers for clinical use, which should ultimately improve patient care. Nature Publishing Group 2003-04-22 2003-04-15 /pmc/articles/PMC2747576/ /pubmed/12698183 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6600886 Text en Copyright © 2003 Cancer Research UK https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material.If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Clinical
Riley, R D
Abrams, K R
Sutton, A J
Lambert, P C
Jones, D R
Heney, D
Burchill, S A
Reporting of prognostic markers: current problems and development of guidelines for evidence-based practice in the future
title Reporting of prognostic markers: current problems and development of guidelines for evidence-based practice in the future
title_full Reporting of prognostic markers: current problems and development of guidelines for evidence-based practice in the future
title_fullStr Reporting of prognostic markers: current problems and development of guidelines for evidence-based practice in the future
title_full_unstemmed Reporting of prognostic markers: current problems and development of guidelines for evidence-based practice in the future
title_short Reporting of prognostic markers: current problems and development of guidelines for evidence-based practice in the future
title_sort reporting of prognostic markers: current problems and development of guidelines for evidence-based practice in the future
topic Clinical
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2747576/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12698183
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6600886
work_keys_str_mv AT rileyrd reportingofprognosticmarkerscurrentproblemsanddevelopmentofguidelinesforevidencebasedpracticeinthefuture
AT abramskr reportingofprognosticmarkerscurrentproblemsanddevelopmentofguidelinesforevidencebasedpracticeinthefuture
AT suttonaj reportingofprognosticmarkerscurrentproblemsanddevelopmentofguidelinesforevidencebasedpracticeinthefuture
AT lambertpc reportingofprognosticmarkerscurrentproblemsanddevelopmentofguidelinesforevidencebasedpracticeinthefuture
AT jonesdr reportingofprognosticmarkerscurrentproblemsanddevelopmentofguidelinesforevidencebasedpracticeinthefuture
AT heneyd reportingofprognosticmarkerscurrentproblemsanddevelopmentofguidelinesforevidencebasedpracticeinthefuture
AT burchillsa reportingofprognosticmarkerscurrentproblemsanddevelopmentofguidelinesforevidencebasedpracticeinthefuture