Markers Models in Survival Analysis and Applications to Issues Associated with AIDS

Jewell and Kalbfleisch (1992) consider the use of marker processes for applications related to estimation of the survival distribution of time to failure. Marker processes were assumed to be stochastic processes that, at a given point in time, provide information about the current hazard and consequently on the remaining time to failure. Particular attention was paid to calculations based on a simple additive model for the relationship between the hazard function at time t and the history of the marker process up until time t. Specific applications to the analysis of AIDS data included the use of markers as surrogate responses for onset of AIDS with censored data and as predictors of the time elapsed since infection in prevalent individuals. Here we review recent work on the use of marker data to tackle these kinds of problems with AIDS data. The Poisson marker process with an additive model, introduced in Jewell and Kalbfleisch (1992) may be a useful "test" example for comparison of various procedures.

RANDOM EFFECTS MODELS IN A META-ANALYSIS OF THE ACCURACY OF DIAGNOSTIC TESTS WITHIN A GOLD STANDARD IN THE PRESENCE OF MISSING DATA

In evaluating the accuracy of diagnosis tests, it is common to apply two imperfect tests jointly or sequentially to a study population. In a recent meta-analysis of the accuracy of microsatellite instability testing (MSI) and traditional mutation analysis (MUT) in predicting germline mutations of the mismatch repair (MMR) genes, a Bayesian approach (Chen, Watson, and Parmigiani 2005) was proposed to handle missing data resulting from partial testing and the lack of a gold standard. In this paper, we demonstrate an improved estimation of the sensitivities and specificities of MSI and MUT by using a nonlinear mixed model and a Bayesian hierarchical model, both of which account for the heterogeneity across studies through study-specific random effects. The methods can be used to estimate the accuracy of two imperfect diagnostic tests in other meta-analyses when the prevalence of disease, the sensitivities and/or the specificities of diagnostic tests are heterogeneous among studies. Furthermore, simulation studies have demonstrated the importance of carefully selecting appropriate random effects on the estimation of diagnostic accuracy measurements in this scenario.