ArticleScientific reports2025
Case-only analysis in small studies of predictive biomarkers.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Characteristics of tumors and patients can be used as predictive biomarkers to guide treatment choice. Although many potential biomarkers are evaluated each year, only few will eventually be used since evidence is usually based on small studies leading to inconclusive results. Such data are often analyzed with Cox proportional hazards regression using a multiplicative interaction term between biomarker and treatment, with insufficient power and possibly biased results. Instead of analyzing patients who do (cases) and do not experience (non-cases) the survival event of interest, case-only analysis with logistic regression has been proposed, however with unknown small sample properties. We evaluated the performance of case-only analysis with bias-eliminating Firth correction and confidence intervals obtained with a profile likelihood method in a simulation study tailored to breast cancer. Our results show that this approach is generally inferior to the full cohort analysis but has acceptable properties when the marker is protective or null among patients treated with the standard treatment, the event rate is low (e.g., a rare event and a protective marker) and treatment assignment is independent of the marker level (e.g., in randomized studies). In such situations, the case-only design offers substantial cost savings. However, the model is sensitive to these assumptions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.