Literature DB >> 12505240

Statistical challenges in the evaluation of surrogate endpoints in randomized trials.

Geert Molenberghs1, Marc Buyse, Helena Geys, Didier Renard, Tomasz Burzykowski, Ariel Alonso.   

Abstract

The validation of surrogate endpoints has been studied by Prentice, who presented a definition as well as a set of criteria that are equivalent if the surrogate and true endpoints are binary. Freedman et al. supplemented these criteria with the so-called proportion explained. Buyse and Molenberghs proposed to replace the proportion explained by two quantities: (1). the relative effect, linking the effect of treatment on both endpoints, and (2). the adjusted association, an individual-level measure of agreement between both endpoints. In a multiunit setting, these quantities can be generalized to a trial-level measure of surrogacy and an individual-level measure of surrogacy. In this paper, we argue that such a multiunit approach should be adopted because it overcomes difficulties that necessarily surround validation efforts based on a single trial. These difficulties are highlighted.

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12505240     DOI: 10.1016/s0197-2456(02)00236-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Control Clin Trials        ISSN: 0197-2456


  26 in total

1.  Comparing biomarkers as principal surrogate endpoints.

Authors:  Ying Huang; Peter B Gilbert
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2011-04-22       Impact factor: 2.571

Review 2.  Statistics in clinical trials.

Authors:  Stephanie J Green; Donna K Pauler
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 5.075

Review 3.  Biomarkers and surrogate end points--the challenge of statistical validation.

Authors:  Marc Buyse; Daniel J Sargent; Axel Grothey; Alastair Matheson; Aimery de Gramont
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2010-04-06       Impact factor: 66.675

4.  The intermediate endpoint effect in logistic and probit regression.

Authors:  D P MacKinnon; C M Lockwood; C H Brown; W Wang; J M Hoffman
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 2.486

5.  ASSESSING SURROGATE ENDPOINTS IN VACCINE TRIALS WITH CASE-COHORT SAMPLING AND THE COX MODEL.

Authors:  Li Qin; Peter B Gilbert; Dean Follmann; Dongfeng Li
Journal:  Ann Appl Stat       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 2.083

6.  Center-Within-Trial Versus Trial-Level Evaluation of Surrogate Endpoints.

Authors:  Lindsay A Renfro; Qian Shi; Yuan Xue; Junlong Li; Hongwei Shang; Daniel J Sargent
Journal:  Comput Stat Data Anal       Date:  2014-10-01       Impact factor: 1.681

Review 7.  The perils of surrogate endpoints.

Authors:  William S Weintraub; Thomas F Lüscher; Stuart Pocock
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2015-05-13       Impact factor: 29.983

8.  Variation over time and interdependence between disease progression and death among patients with glioblastoma on RTOG 0525.

Authors:  Meihua Wang; James J Dignam; Minhee Won; Walter Curran; Minesh Mehta; Mark R Gilbert
Journal:  Neuro Oncol       Date:  2015-02-16       Impact factor: 12.300

9.  Five criteria for using a surrogate endpoint to predict treatment effect based on data from multiple previous trials.

Authors:  Stuart G Baker
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2017-11-21       Impact factor: 2.373

Review 10.  Meta-analysis for the evaluation of surrogate endpoints in cancer clinical trials.

Authors:  Qian Shi; Daniel J Sargent
Journal:  Int J Clin Oncol       Date:  2009-04-24       Impact factor: 3.402

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.