Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

How to judge a tumor marker

  • Viewpoint
  • Published:

From Nature Clinical Practice Oncology

View current issue Sign up to alerts

An Article Report to this article was published on 04 October 2005

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. McShane LM et al. (2005) Reporting recommendations for tumor marker prognostic studies (REMARK). Nat Clin Pract Oncol 2: 416–422

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bast RC et al. (2001) 2000 Update of recommendations for the use of tumor markers in breast and colorectal cancer: clinical practice guidelines of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. J Clin Oncol 19: 1865–1878

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Chatfield C (1995) Model uncertainty, data mining and statistical inference. J R Stat Soc [Ser A] 158: 419–466

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Kattan MW (2003) Judging new markers by their ability to improve predictive accuracy. J Natl Cancer Inst 95: 634–635

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Harrell FE et al. (1996) Multivariable prognostic models: issues in developing models, evaluating assumptions and adequacy, and measuring and reducing errors. Stat Med 15: 361–387

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Kattan MW and Gonen M Prediction from multivariable regression models. Urol Oncol, in press

  7. Breiman L (2001) Statistical modeling: the two cultures. Stat Sci 16: 199–231

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Efron B and Tibshirani RJ (1998) An introduction to the bootstrap. NY: Chapman & Hall/CRC

    Google Scholar 

  9. Ehrenberg ASC and Bound JA (1993) Predictability and prediction. J R Stat Soc [Ser A] 156: 167–206

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Hayes DF et al. (1996) Tumor Marker Utility Grading System: a framework to evaluate clinical utility of tumor markers. J Natl Cancer Inst 88: 1456–1466

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. biostatistician in the Department of Quantitative Health Sciences at the Cleveland Clinic Foundation,

    Ethan M Katz MS

  2. the Chairman of the Department of Quantitative Health Sciences at the Cleveland Clinic Foundation,

    Michael W Kattan PhD

Authors
  1. Ethan M Katz MS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michael W Kattan PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ethan M Katz MS.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Related links

Related links

Related links in Nature Research

Reporting recommendations for tumor marker prognostic studies (REMARK)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Katz, E., Kattan, M. How to judge a tumor marker. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2, 482–483 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1038/ncponc0318

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ncponc0318

  • Springer Nature Limited

This article is cited by

Search

Navigation