IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v36y2016i5p594-603.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparative Effectiveness of Biomarkers to Target Cancer Treatment

Author

Listed:
  • Jeanette K. Birnbaum
  • Foluso O. Ademuyiwa
  • Josh J. Carlson
  • Leslie Mallinger
  • Mark W. Mason
  • Ruth Etzioni

Abstract

Background. Biomarkers used at the time of diagnosis to tailor treatment decisions may diffuse into clinical practice before data become available on whether biomarker testing reduces cancer mortality. In the interim, quantitative estimates of the mortality impact of testing are needed to assess the value of these diagnostic biomarkers. These estimates are typically generated by customized models that are resource intensive to build and apply. Methods. We developed a user-friendly system of models for Cancer Translation of Comparative Effectiveness Research (CANTRANce) to model the mortality impact of cancer interventions. The Diagnostic Biomarker module of this system projects the mortality impact of testing for a diagnostic biomarker, given data on how testing affects treatment recommendations. Costs and quality-of-life outcomes may also be modeled. We applied the Diagnostic Biomarker module to 2 case studies to demonstrate its capabilities. Results. The user interface ( http://www.fhcrc.org/cantrance ) allows comparative effectiveness researchers to use the Diagnostic Biomarker module of CANTRANce. Our case studies indicate that the model produces estimates on par with those generated by customized models and is a strong tool for quickly generating novel projections. Limitations. The simple structure that makes CANTRANce user-friendly also constrains the complexity with which cancer progression can be modeled. The quality of the results rests on the quality of the input data, which may pertain to small or dissimilar populations or suffer from informative censoring. Conclusions. The Diagnostic Biomarker module of CANTRANce is a novel public resource that can provide timely insights into the expected mortality impact of testing for diagnostic biomarkers. The model projections should be useful for understanding the long-term potential of emerging diagnostic biomarkers.

Suggested Citation

  • Jeanette K. Birnbaum & Foluso O. Ademuyiwa & Josh J. Carlson & Leslie Mallinger & Mark W. Mason & Ruth Etzioni, 2016. "Comparative Effectiveness of Biomarkers to Target Cancer Treatment," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 36(5), pages 594-603, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:36:y:2016:i:5:p:594-603
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X15601998
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X15601998
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X15601998?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:36:y:2016:i:5:p:594-603. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.