Abstract

BackgroundThe United Kingdom Myeloma Research Alliance (UK-MRA) Myeloma Risk Profile is a prognostic model for overall survival. It was trained and tested on clinical trial data, aiming to improve the stratification of transplant ineligible (TNE) patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Missing data is a common problem which affects the development and validation of prognostic models, where decisions on how to address missingness have implications on the choice of methodology.MethodsModel buildingThe training and test datasets were the TNE pathways from two large randomised multicentre, phase III clinical trials. Potential prognostic factors were identified by expert opinion. Missing data in the training dataset was imputed using multiple imputation by chained equations. Univariate analysis fitted Cox proportional hazards models in each imputed dataset with the estimates combined by Rubin’s rules. Multivariable analysis applied penalised Cox regression models, with a fixed penalty term across the imputed datasets. The estimates from each imputed dataset and bootstrap standard errors were combined by Rubin’s rules to define the prognostic model.Model assessmentCalibration was assessed by visualising the observed and predicted probabilities across the imputed datasets. Discrimination was assessed by combining the prognostic separation D-statistic from each imputed dataset by Rubin’s rules.Model validationThe D-statistic was applied in a bootstrap internal validation process in the training dataset and an external validation process in the test dataset, where acceptable performance was pre-specified.Development of risk groupsRisk groups were defined using the tertiles of the combined prognostic index, obtained by combining the prognostic index from each imputed dataset by Rubin’s rules.ResultsThe training dataset included 1852 patients, 1268 (68.47%) with complete case data. Ten imputed datasets were generated. Five hundred twenty patients were included in the test dataset. The D-statistic for the prognostic model was 0.840 (95% CI 0.716–0.964) in the training dataset and 0.654 (95% CI 0.497–0.811) in the test dataset and the corrected D-Statistic was 0.801.ConclusionThe decision to impute missing covariate data in the training dataset influenced the methods implemented to train and test the model. To extend current literature and aid future researchers, we have presented a detailed example of one approach. Whilst our example is not without limitations, a benefit is that all of the patient information available in the training dataset was utilised to develop the model.Trial registrationBoth trials were registered; Myeloma IX-ISRCTN68454111, registered 21 September 2000. Myeloma XI-ISRCTN49407852, registered 24 June 2009.

Highlights

  • The United Kingdom Myeloma Research Alliance (UK-MRA) Myeloma Risk Profile is a prognostic model for overall survival

  • The D-statistic for the prognostic model was 0.840 in the training dataset and 0.654 in the test dataset and the corrected D-Statistic was 0.801

  • To extend current literature and aid future researchers, we have presented a detailed example of one approach

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The United Kingdom Myeloma Research Alliance (UK-MRA) Myeloma Risk Profile is a prognostic model for overall survival It was trained and tested on clinical trial data, aiming to improve the stratification of transplant ineligible (TNE) patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Model assessment considers how the developed prognostic model performs by investigating both the calibration (how well the predicted probabilities of the event of interest from the prognostic model match the empirical probabilities) and discrimination (whether those who experience the outcome of interest will be predicted to have it) Model validation considers both how the prognostic model performs in the training dataset (internal validation) and in the test dataset (external validation). The development of risk groups suggests how the prognostic model can be used to stratify patients into how likely they are to experience the outcome, which in this study was survival

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call