» Articles » PMID: 29977101

Group Testing Case Identification with Biomarker Information

Overview
Date 2018 Jul 7
PMID 29977101
Citations 7
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Screening procedures for infectious diseases, such as HIV, often involve pooling individual specimens together and testing the pools. For diseases with low prevalence, group testing (or pooled testing) can be used to classify individuals as diseased or not while providing considerable cost savings when compared to testing specimens individually. The pooling literature is replete with group testing case identification algorithms including Dorfman testing, higher-stage hierarchical procedures, and array testing. Although these algorithms are usually evaluated on the basis of the expected number of tests and classification accuracy, most evaluations in the literature do not account for the continuous nature of the testing responses and thus invoke potentially restrictive assumptions to characterize an algorithm's performance. Commonly used case identification algorithms in group testing are considered and are evaluated by taking a different approach. Instead of treating testing responses as binary random variables (i.e., diseased/not), evaluations are made by exploiting an assay's underlying continuous biomarker distributions for positive and negative individuals. In doing so, a general framework to describe the operating characteristics of group testing case identification algorithms is provided when these distributions are known. The methodology is illustrated using two HIV testing examples taken from the pooling literature.

Citing Articles

Nested Group Testing Procedure.

Xiong W, Ding J, Zhang W, Liu A, Li Q Commun Math Stat. 2022; :1-31.

PMID: 36213843 PMC: 9525165. DOI: 10.1007/s40304-021-00269-0.


Capturing the pool dilution effect in group testing regression: A Bayesian approach.

Self S, McMahan C, Mokalled S Stat Med. 2022; 41(23):4682-4696.

PMID: 35879887 PMC: 9489666. DOI: 10.1002/sim.9532.


Pooled testing efficiency increases with test frequency.

Augenblick N, Kolstad J, Obermeyer Z, Wang A Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2022; 119(2).

PMID: 34983870 PMC: 8764680. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2105180119.


Prediction-driven pooled testing methods: Application to HIV treatment monitoring in Rakai, Uganda.

Brand A, May S, Hughes J, Nakigozi G, Reynolds S, Gabriel E Stat Med. 2021; 40(19):4185-4199.

PMID: 34046930 PMC: 8487918. DOI: 10.1002/sim.9022.


Optimal uses of pooled testing for COVID-19 incorporating imperfect test performance and pool dilution effect: An application to congregate settings in Los Angeles County.

Nianogo R, Emeruwa I, Gounder P, Manuel V, Anderson N, Kuo T J Med Virol. 2021; 93(9):5396-5404.

PMID: 33930195 PMC: 8242460. DOI: 10.1002/jmv.27054.


References
1.
Chen C, Swallow W . Using group testing to estimate a proportion, and to test the binomial model. Biometrics. 1990; 46(4):1035-46. View

2.
Tebbs J, McMahan C, Bilder C . Two-stage hierarchical group testing for multiple infections with application to the infertility prevention project. Biometrics. 2013; 69(4):1064-73. PMC: 4371872. DOI: 10.1111/biom.12080. View

3.
Lewis J, Lockary V, Kobic S . Cost savings and increased efficiency using a stratified specimen pooling strategy for Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae. Sex Transm Dis. 2011; 39(1):46-8. DOI: 10.1097/OLQ.0b013e318231cd4a. View

4.
Lendle S, Hudgens M, Qaqish B . Group testing for case identification with correlated responses. Biometrics. 2011; 68(2):532-40. PMC: 3384753. DOI: 10.1111/j.1541-0420.2011.01674.x. View

5.
Tu X, Litvak E, Pagano M . Studies of AIDS and HIV surveillance. Screening tests: can we get more by doing less?. Stat Med. 1994; 13(19-20):1905-19. DOI: 10.1002/sim.4780131904. View