Should biomarker estimates of HIV incidence be adjusted?

To evaluate adjustment procedures that have been proposed to correct HIV incidence rates derived from cross-sectional surveys of biomarkers (e.g. BED capture enzyme immunoassay). These procedures were motivated by some reports that the biomarker BED approach overestimates incidence when compared to...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:AIDS (London) 2009-02, Vol.23 (4), p.485-491
1. Verfasser: BROOKMEYER, Ron
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 491
container_issue 4
container_start_page 485
container_title AIDS (London)
container_volume 23
creator BROOKMEYER, Ron
description To evaluate adjustment procedures that have been proposed to correct HIV incidence rates derived from cross-sectional surveys of biomarkers (e.g. BED capture enzyme immunoassay). These procedures were motivated by some reports that the biomarker BED approach overestimates incidence when compared to cohort studies. Consideration of the Hargrove and McDougal adjustment procedures that adjust biomarker estimates of HIV incidence rates for misclassification with respect to the timing of infections. : Performed mathematical and statistical analysis of the adjustment formulas. Evaluated sources of error in cohort studies of incidence that could also explain discrepancies between cohort and biomarker estimates. The McDougal adjustment has no net effect on the estimate of HIV incidence because false positives exactly counterbalance false negatives. The Hargrove adjustment has a mathematical error that can cause significant underestimation of HIV incidence rates, especially if there is a large pool of prevalent long-standing infections. The two adjustment procedures of biomarker incidence estimates evaluated here that purport to correct for misclassification do not increase accuracy and in some situations can introduce significant bias. Instead, the accuracy of biomarker estimates can be increased through improvements in the estimates of the mean window period of the populations under study and the representativeness of the cross-sectional samples. Cohort estimates of incidence are also subject to important sources of error and should not blindly be considered the gold standard for assessing the validity of biomarker estimates.
doi_str_mv 10.1097/QAD.0b013e3283269e28
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_66966376</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>66966376</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c463t-acf867bd2fa37e9c0a6f11ea14db859db86f65beb93bd039233fc446c836bfb53</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkEtLw0AQgBdRbK3-A5Fc9Ja6j2QfJyn1VSiI-LiGfcxiatrU3eTgv3elQcGLl5lh-GaY-RA6JXhKsBKXj7PrKTaYMGBUMsoVULmHxqQQLC9LQfbRGKdurpjAI3QU4wpjXGIpD9GIKMJTKcZIPr21feMyU7drHd4hZBC7eq07iFnrs_vFa1ZvbO1gYyEzkGm36mMH7uoYHXjdRDgZ8gS93N48z-_z5cPdYj5b5rbgrMu19ZIL46jXTICyWHNPCGhSOCNLlQL3vDRgFDMOM0UZ87YouJWMG29KNkEXu73b0H706bhqXUcLTaM30Pax4lxxzgT_F6S44KUiOIHFDrShjTGAr7YhfRw-K4Krb7VVUlv9VZvGzob9vVmD-x0aXCbgfAB0tLrxQSdx8YejhEolqGJfMRiBjA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>20465910</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Should biomarker estimates of HIV incidence be adjusted?</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>Journals@Ovid Complete</source><creator>BROOKMEYER, Ron</creator><creatorcontrib>BROOKMEYER, Ron</creatorcontrib><description>To evaluate adjustment procedures that have been proposed to correct HIV incidence rates derived from cross-sectional surveys of biomarkers (e.g. BED capture enzyme immunoassay). These procedures were motivated by some reports that the biomarker BED approach overestimates incidence when compared to cohort studies. Consideration of the Hargrove and McDougal adjustment procedures that adjust biomarker estimates of HIV incidence rates for misclassification with respect to the timing of infections. : Performed mathematical and statistical analysis of the adjustment formulas. Evaluated sources of error in cohort studies of incidence that could also explain discrepancies between cohort and biomarker estimates. The McDougal adjustment has no net effect on the estimate of HIV incidence because false positives exactly counterbalance false negatives. The Hargrove adjustment has a mathematical error that can cause significant underestimation of HIV incidence rates, especially if there is a large pool of prevalent long-standing infections. The two adjustment procedures of biomarker incidence estimates evaluated here that purport to correct for misclassification do not increase accuracy and in some situations can introduce significant bias. Instead, the accuracy of biomarker estimates can be increased through improvements in the estimates of the mean window period of the populations under study and the representativeness of the cross-sectional samples. Cohort estimates of incidence are also subject to important sources of error and should not blindly be considered the gold standard for assessing the validity of biomarker estimates.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0269-9370</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1473-5571</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1097/QAD.0b013e3283269e28</identifier><identifier>PMID: 19165087</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Hagerstown, MD: Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins</publisher><subject>AIDS Serodiagnosis - methods ; AIDS/HIV ; Biological and medical sciences ; Biomarkers - blood ; Epidemiologic Methods ; HIV Infections - diagnosis ; HIV Infections - epidemiology ; Human immunodeficiency virus ; Human viral diseases ; Humans ; Immunodeficiencies ; Immunodeficiencies. Immunoglobulinopathies ; Immunopathology ; Infectious diseases ; Medical sciences ; Viral diseases ; Viral diseases of the lymphoid tissue and the blood. Aids</subject><ispartof>AIDS (London), 2009-02, Vol.23 (4), p.485-491</ispartof><rights>2009 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c463t-acf867bd2fa37e9c0a6f11ea14db859db86f65beb93bd039233fc446c836bfb53</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c463t-acf867bd2fa37e9c0a6f11ea14db859db86f65beb93bd039233fc446c836bfb53</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=21289729$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19165087$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>BROOKMEYER, Ron</creatorcontrib><title>Should biomarker estimates of HIV incidence be adjusted?</title><title>AIDS (London)</title><addtitle>AIDS</addtitle><description>To evaluate adjustment procedures that have been proposed to correct HIV incidence rates derived from cross-sectional surveys of biomarkers (e.g. BED capture enzyme immunoassay). These procedures were motivated by some reports that the biomarker BED approach overestimates incidence when compared to cohort studies. Consideration of the Hargrove and McDougal adjustment procedures that adjust biomarker estimates of HIV incidence rates for misclassification with respect to the timing of infections. : Performed mathematical and statistical analysis of the adjustment formulas. Evaluated sources of error in cohort studies of incidence that could also explain discrepancies between cohort and biomarker estimates. The McDougal adjustment has no net effect on the estimate of HIV incidence because false positives exactly counterbalance false negatives. The Hargrove adjustment has a mathematical error that can cause significant underestimation of HIV incidence rates, especially if there is a large pool of prevalent long-standing infections. The two adjustment procedures of biomarker incidence estimates evaluated here that purport to correct for misclassification do not increase accuracy and in some situations can introduce significant bias. Instead, the accuracy of biomarker estimates can be increased through improvements in the estimates of the mean window period of the populations under study and the representativeness of the cross-sectional samples. Cohort estimates of incidence are also subject to important sources of error and should not blindly be considered the gold standard for assessing the validity of biomarker estimates.</description><subject>AIDS Serodiagnosis - methods</subject><subject>AIDS/HIV</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Biomarkers - blood</subject><subject>Epidemiologic Methods</subject><subject>HIV Infections - diagnosis</subject><subject>HIV Infections - epidemiology</subject><subject>Human immunodeficiency virus</subject><subject>Human viral diseases</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Immunodeficiencies</subject><subject>Immunodeficiencies. Immunoglobulinopathies</subject><subject>Immunopathology</subject><subject>Infectious diseases</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Viral diseases</subject><subject>Viral diseases of the lymphoid tissue and the blood. Aids</subject><issn>0269-9370</issn><issn>1473-5571</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2009</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkEtLw0AQgBdRbK3-A5Fc9Ja6j2QfJyn1VSiI-LiGfcxiatrU3eTgv3elQcGLl5lh-GaY-RA6JXhKsBKXj7PrKTaYMGBUMsoVULmHxqQQLC9LQfbRGKdurpjAI3QU4wpjXGIpD9GIKMJTKcZIPr21feMyU7drHd4hZBC7eq07iFnrs_vFa1ZvbO1gYyEzkGm36mMH7uoYHXjdRDgZ8gS93N48z-_z5cPdYj5b5rbgrMu19ZIL46jXTICyWHNPCGhSOCNLlQL3vDRgFDMOM0UZ87YouJWMG29KNkEXu73b0H706bhqXUcLTaM30Pax4lxxzgT_F6S44KUiOIHFDrShjTGAr7YhfRw-K4Krb7VVUlv9VZvGzob9vVmD-x0aXCbgfAB0tLrxQSdx8YejhEolqGJfMRiBjA</recordid><startdate>20090220</startdate><enddate>20090220</enddate><creator>BROOKMEYER, Ron</creator><general>Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20090220</creationdate><title>Should biomarker estimates of HIV incidence be adjusted?</title><author>BROOKMEYER, Ron</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c463t-acf867bd2fa37e9c0a6f11ea14db859db86f65beb93bd039233fc446c836bfb53</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2009</creationdate><topic>AIDS Serodiagnosis - methods</topic><topic>AIDS/HIV</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Biomarkers - blood</topic><topic>Epidemiologic Methods</topic><topic>HIV Infections - diagnosis</topic><topic>HIV Infections - epidemiology</topic><topic>Human immunodeficiency virus</topic><topic>Human viral diseases</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Immunodeficiencies</topic><topic>Immunodeficiencies. Immunoglobulinopathies</topic><topic>Immunopathology</topic><topic>Infectious diseases</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Viral diseases</topic><topic>Viral diseases of the lymphoid tissue and the blood. Aids</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>BROOKMEYER, Ron</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>AIDS (London)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>BROOKMEYER, Ron</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Should biomarker estimates of HIV incidence be adjusted?</atitle><jtitle>AIDS (London)</jtitle><addtitle>AIDS</addtitle><date>2009-02-20</date><risdate>2009</risdate><volume>23</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>485</spage><epage>491</epage><pages>485-491</pages><issn>0269-9370</issn><eissn>1473-5571</eissn><abstract>To evaluate adjustment procedures that have been proposed to correct HIV incidence rates derived from cross-sectional surveys of biomarkers (e.g. BED capture enzyme immunoassay). These procedures were motivated by some reports that the biomarker BED approach overestimates incidence when compared to cohort studies. Consideration of the Hargrove and McDougal adjustment procedures that adjust biomarker estimates of HIV incidence rates for misclassification with respect to the timing of infections. : Performed mathematical and statistical analysis of the adjustment formulas. Evaluated sources of error in cohort studies of incidence that could also explain discrepancies between cohort and biomarker estimates. The McDougal adjustment has no net effect on the estimate of HIV incidence because false positives exactly counterbalance false negatives. The Hargrove adjustment has a mathematical error that can cause significant underestimation of HIV incidence rates, especially if there is a large pool of prevalent long-standing infections. The two adjustment procedures of biomarker incidence estimates evaluated here that purport to correct for misclassification do not increase accuracy and in some situations can introduce significant bias. Instead, the accuracy of biomarker estimates can be increased through improvements in the estimates of the mean window period of the populations under study and the representativeness of the cross-sectional samples. Cohort estimates of incidence are also subject to important sources of error and should not blindly be considered the gold standard for assessing the validity of biomarker estimates.</abstract><cop>Hagerstown, MD</cop><pub>Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins</pub><pmid>19165087</pmid><doi>10.1097/QAD.0b013e3283269e28</doi><tpages>7</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0269-9370
ispartof AIDS (London), 2009-02, Vol.23 (4), p.485-491
issn 0269-9370
1473-5571
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_66966376
source MEDLINE; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; Journals@Ovid Complete
subjects AIDS Serodiagnosis - methods
AIDS/HIV
Biological and medical sciences
Biomarkers - blood
Epidemiologic Methods
HIV Infections - diagnosis
HIV Infections - epidemiology
Human immunodeficiency virus
Human viral diseases
Humans
Immunodeficiencies
Immunodeficiencies. Immunoglobulinopathies
Immunopathology
Infectious diseases
Medical sciences
Viral diseases
Viral diseases of the lymphoid tissue and the blood. Aids
title Should biomarker estimates of HIV incidence be adjusted?
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-03T00%3A10%3A36IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Should%20biomarker%20estimates%20of%20HIV%20incidence%20be%20adjusted?&rft.jtitle=AIDS%20(London)&rft.au=BROOKMEYER,%20Ron&rft.date=2009-02-20&rft.volume=23&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=485&rft.epage=491&rft.pages=485-491&rft.issn=0269-9370&rft.eissn=1473-5571&rft_id=info:doi/10.1097/QAD.0b013e3283269e28&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E66966376%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=20465910&rft_id=info:pmid/19165087&rfr_iscdi=true