Back
Full-text
Journal article

Discordance Analysis Characteristics as a New Method to Compare the Diagnostic Accuracy of Tests: Example of Complexed Versus Total Prostate-Specific Antigen

  • Keller, Thomas ACOMED Statistik, Leipzig, Germany
  • Butz, Hermann Bayer Vital GmbH, Leverkusen, Germany
  • Lein, Michael Department of Urology, University Hospital Charité, Humboldt University Berlin, Berlin, Germany
  • Kwiatkowski, Maciej Department of Urology, Kantonsspital Aarau, Aarau, Switzerland
  • Semjonow, Axel Department of Urology, University Hospital Münster, Münster, Germany
  • Luboldt, Hans-Joachim Department of Urology, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany
  • Hammerer, Peter Department of Urology, Städtisches Klinikum Braunschweig, Braunschweig, Germany
  • Stephan, Carsten Department of Urology, University Hospital Charité, Humboldt University Berlin, Berlin, Germany
  • Jung, Klaus Department of Urology, University Hospital Charité, Humboldt University Berlin, Berlin, Germany
Show more…
  • 2005-3-1
Published in:
  • Clinical Chemistry. - Oxford University Press (OUP). - 2005, vol. 51, no. 3, p. 532-539
Clinical Biochemistry
Biochemistry, medical
English Abstract
Background: ROC curve analysis is used to compare the overall diagnostic accuracy of tests, but its application to subgroups selected by a concentration range of only one marker may show severe biases. We developed a new approach, which we have named discordance analysis characteristics (DAC).
Methods: The DAC method is based on a generalization of the McNemar test so that for a given pair of cutoff values only those patients are analyzed who are categorized differently by the two tests compared. The analyses are performed for all cutoff pairs that deliver identical sensitivities for both tests. We used data for total (tPSA) and complexed prostate-specific antigen (cPSA) from a recently published multicenter study to demonstrate the DAC method.
Results: The example shows that ROC analyses of subgroups can give contradictory results about the diagnostic accuracy of two markers, depending on the marker used for the selection of subgroups. The DAC method avoids artifacts attributable to questionable selection of subgroups and facilitates overall and local comparisons of the diagnostic accuracy of tests. The DAC results of the analyzed data set suggest that cPSA has higher diagnostic accuracy than does tPSA.
Conclusions: The DAC method is a suitable tool for comparing the clinical usefulness of laboratory markers. The DAC method could be considered as an additional tool to ROC analysis and could replace comparative ROC analyses of diagnostic tests, especially within subgroups defined by only one of the markers.
Language
  • English
Open access status
bronze
Identifiers
Persistent URL
https://sonar.ch/global/documents/139914
Statistics
Document views: 21 File downloads:
  • Full-text: 0