Independent validation test of the vote-counting strategy used to rank biomarkers from published studies.

ABSTRACT:

Aim

Vote counting is frequently used in meta-analyses to rank biomarker candidates, but to our knowledge, there have been no independent assessments of its validity. Here, we used predictions from a recent meta-analysis to determine how well number of supporting studies, combined sample size and mean fold change performed as vote-counting strategy criteria.

Materials & methods

Fifty miRNAs previously ranked for their ability to distinguish lung cancer tissue from normal were assayed by RT-qPCR using 45 paired tumor-normal samples.

Results

Number of supporting studies predicted biomarker performance (p = 0.0006; r = 0.44), but sample size and fold change did not (p > 0.2).

Conclusion

Despite limitations, counting the number supporting studies appears to be an ef

SUBMITTER: Rikke BA 

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4770796 | biostudies-literature | 2015

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature