Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Prognostic assessment from studies with non-randomized treatment assignment

L A Kiemeney1, A L Verbeek, J C van Houwelingen

  • 1Department of Epidemiology, University of Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
|March 1, 1994
PubMed
Summary

To accurately evaluate prognostic factors for patient risk stratification, it is best to exclude patients receiving adjuvant therapy. This approach avoids bias from treatment interactions, ensuring reliable prognostic assessment.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Validation and reliability of the Dutch version of the EORTC QLQ-BLM30 module for assessing the health-related quality of life of patients with muscle invasive bladder cancer.

Health and quality of life outcomes·2022
Same author

Role of multidisciplinary team meetings in implementation of chemohormonal therapy in metastatic prostate cancer in daily practice.

Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases·2022
Same author

Corrigendum to "Urinary incontinence and erectile dysfunction in patients with localized or locally advanced prostate cancer: A nationwide observational study".

Urologic oncology·2022
Same author

Histopathological re-evaluations of biopsies in prostate cancer: a nationwide observational study.

Scandinavian journal of urology·2020
Same author

Urinary incontinence and erectile dysfunction in patients with localized or locally advanced prostate cancer: A nationwide observational study.

Urologic oncology·2020
Same author

Insight into bladder cancer care: study protocol of a large nationwide prospective cohort study (BlaZIB).

BMC cancer·2020

Area of Science:

  • Clinical Epidemiology
  • Biostatistics
  • Oncology

Background:

  • Prognostic factors are crucial for identifying patients needing aggressive treatment.
  • Adjuvant therapy can obscure the true effect of prognostic factors, leading to biased assessments.
  • Covariate-treatment interactions, if undetected, can significantly impact prognostic factor evaluation.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To evaluate the impact of adjuvant therapy on the assessment of prognostic factors.
  • To propose an optimal study design for reliable prognostic factor evaluation.
  • To address potential biases in prognostic factor analysis due to treatment interactions.

Main Methods:

  • The study advocates for restricting analysis to patients not receiving adjuvant therapy.

Related Experiment Videos

  • It discusses the potential for bias in both randomized and non-randomized treatment assignment studies.
  • The analysis considers the role of known prognostic factors in non-randomized treatment assignment.

    • Main Results:

    • Adjuvant therapy can dilute the effect of prognostic factors, creating undetected covariate-treatment interactions.
    • These interactions introduce bias in estimating the true effects of prognostic factors.
    • Restricting the study population to those without adjuvant therapy avoids these undetectable biases.

    Conclusions:

    • Excluding patients on adjuvant therapy provides a more accurate evaluation of prognostic factors.
    • While potentially reducing statistical power, this restriction avoids significant biases.
    • This methodology remains valid for non-randomized treatment assignments if all relevant prognostic factors are included.