EconPapers    
Economics at your fingertips  
 

Measures of Performance and Clinical Superiority Thresholds for ‘Test-and-treat’ Predictive Biomarkers

Neil Hawkins (), Janet Bouttell and Dmitry Ponomarev
Additional contact information
Neil Hawkins: University of Glasgow
Janet Bouttell: Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, QMC
Dmitry Ponomarev: Liverpool Hospital, South Western Sydney Local Health District

Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, 2025, vol. 23, issue 1, No 6, 65-74

Abstract: Abstract Background Predictive biomarkers are intended to predict an individual’s expected response to specific treatments. These are an important component of precision medicine. We explore measures of biomarker performance that are based on the expected probability of response to individual treatment conditional on biomarker status. We show how these measures can be used to establish thresholds at which testing strategies will be clinically superior. Methods We used a decision model to compare expected probabilities of response of treat-all and test-and-treat strategies. Based on this, R-Shiny-based apps were developed which produce plots of the threshold positive and negative predictive values or sensitivities and specificities above which a ‘test-and-treat’ strategy will outperform a ‘treat-all’ strategy. We present a case study using data on the use of RAS status to predict response to panitumumab in metastatic colorectal cancer. Results Where a companion diagnostic is predictive of response to one of the treatments being compared, it is possible to estimate threshold sensitivities and specificities above which a testing strategy will outperform a treat-all strategy, based only on the odds ratio of response. Where negative and positive predictive values were used, the threshold depended on the prevalence of the biomarker-positive patients. Discussion These intuitive performance measures for predictive biomarkers, based on expected response to individual treatments, can be used to identify promising candidate companion diagnostic tests and indicate the potential magnitude of the net benefit of testing.

Date: 2025
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40258-024-00906-z Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:aphecp:v:23:y:2025:i:1:d:10.1007_s40258-024-00906-z

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/40258

DOI: 10.1007/s40258-024-00906-z

Access Statistics for this article

Applied Health Economics and Health Policy is currently edited by Timothy Wrightson

More articles in Applied Health Economics and Health Policy from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().

 
Page updated 2025-03-20
Handle: RePEc:spr:aphecp:v:23:y:2025:i:1:d:10.1007_s40258-024-00906-z