Biostatistics Advance Access published online on January 20, 2006
Biostatistics, doi:10.1093/biostatistics/kxj018
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1 Department of Biostatistics, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD 21205, U.S.A.
* To whom correspondence should be addressed. The case-control design is frequently used to study the discriminatory accuracy of a screening or diagnostic biomarker. Yet, the appropriate ratio in which to sample cases and controls has never been determined. It is common for researchers to sample equal numbers of cases and controls, a strategy that can be optimal for studies of association. However, considerations are quite different when the biomarker is to be used for classification. In this paper, we provide an expression for the optimal case-control ratio, when the accuracy of the biomarker is quantified by the ROC curve. We show how it can be integrated with choosing the overall sample size to yield an efficient study design with specified power and type-I error. We also derive the optimal case-control ratios for estimating the area under the ROC curve and the area under part of the ROC curve. Our methods are applied to a study of a new marker for adenocarcinoma in patients with Barrett's esophagus.
Received March 2, 2005
Revised January 17, 2006
Accepted January 17, 2006
Article
The optimal ratio of cases to controls for estimating the classification accuracy of a biomarker
Holly Janes 1 *
and
Margaret Pepe 2
2 Department of Biostatistics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, U.S.A.; Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, 1100 Fairview Avenue North, Seattle, WA 98195, U.S.A.
Holly Janes, E-mail: hjanes{at}jhsph.edu
![]()
Abstract ![]()
CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
K. Soreide Receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis in diagnostic, prognostic and predictive biomarker research J. Clin. Pathol., January 1, 2009; 62(1): 1 - 5. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
