A comparison of Bayesian and frequentist approaches to incorporating external information for the prediction of prostate cancer risk.

Newcombe, PJ; Reck, BH; Sun, J; Platek, GT; Verzilli, C; Kader, AK; Kim, ST; Hsu, FC; Zhang, Z; Zheng, SL; Mooser, VE; Condreay, LD; Spraggs, CF; Whittaker, JC; Rittmaster, RS; Xu, J; (2012) A comparison of Bayesian and frequentist approaches to incorporating external information for the prediction of prostate cancer risk. Genetic epidemiology, 36 (1). pp. 71-83. ISSN 0741-0395 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/gepi.21600

Full text not available from this repository.


: We present the most comprehensive comparison to date of the predictive benefit of genetics in addition to currently used clinical variables, using genotype data for 33 single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in 1,547 Caucasian men from the placebo arm of the REduction by DUtasteride of prostate Cancer Events (REDUCE®) trial. Moreover, we conducted a detailed comparison of three techniques for incorporating genetics into clinical risk prediction. The first method was a standard logistic regression model, which included separate terms for the clinical covariates and for each of the genetic markers. This approach ignores a substantial amount of external information concerning effect sizes for these Genome Wide Association Study (GWAS)-replicated SNPs. The second and third methods investigated two possible approaches to incorporating meta-analysed external SNP effect estimates - one via a weighted PCa 'risk' score based solely on the meta analysis estimates, and the other incorporating both the current and prior data via informative priors in a Bayesian logistic regression model. All methods demonstrated a slight improvement in predictive performance upon incorporation of genetics. The two methods that incorporated external information showed the greatest receiver-operating-characteristic AUCs increase from 0.61 to 0.64. The value of our methods comparison is likely to lie in observations of performance similarities, rather than difference, between three approaches of very different resource requirements. The two methods that included external information performed best, but only marginally despite substantial differences in complexity.

Item Type: Article
Faculty and Department: Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health > Dept of Non-Communicable Disease Epidemiology
PubMed ID: 22890972
Web of Science ID: 302244400009
URI: http://researchonline.lshtm.ac.uk/id/eprint/354872


Download activity - last 12 months
Downloads since deposit
Accesses by country - last 12 months
Accesses by referrer - last 12 months
Impact and interest
Additional statistics for this record are available via IRStats2

Actions (login required)

Edit Item Edit Item