Literature DB >> 15339295

Prentice's approach and the meta-analytic paradigm: a reflection on the role of statistics in the evaluation of surrogate endpoints.

Ariel Alonso1, Geert Molenberghs, Tomasz Burzykowski, Didier Renard, Helena Geys, Ziv Shkedy, Fabián Tibaldi, José Cortiñas Abrahantes, Marc Buyse.   

Abstract

We put a perspective on the strengths and limitations of statistical methods for the evaluation of surrogate endpoints. Whereas using several trials overcomes some of the limitations of a single-trial framework (Prentice, 1989, Statistics in Medicine 8, 431-440), arguably the evaluation of surrogate endpoints can never be done using only statistical evidence but such evidence should be seen as but one component in a decision-making process that involves, among others, a number of clinical and biological considerations. We briefly present a hierarchical framework that incorporates ideas from Prentice's work and is uniformly applicable to different types of surrogate and true clinical outcomes.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15339295     DOI: 10.1111/j.0006-341X.2004.00222.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biometrics        ISSN: 0006-341X            Impact factor:   2.571


  15 in total

1.  A unified procedure for meta-analytic evaluation of surrogate end points in randomized clinical trials.

Authors:  James Y Dai; James P Hughes
Journal:  Biostatistics       Date:  2012-03-06       Impact factor: 5.899

2.  An information-theoretic approach to surrogate-marker evaluation with failure time endpoints.

Authors:  Assam Pryseley; Abel Tilahun; Ariel Alonso; Geert Molenberghs
Journal:  Lifetime Data Anal       Date:  2010-09-28       Impact factor: 1.588

3.  Statistical controversies in clinical research: an initial evaluation of a surrogate end point using a single randomized clinical trial and the Prentice criteria.

Authors:  G Heller
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2015-08-07       Impact factor: 32.976

4.  Considerations for development of surrogate endpoints for antifracture efficacy of new treatments in osteoporosis: a perspective.

Authors:  Mary L Bouxsein; Pierre D Delmas
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 6.741

5.  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

6.  The association between radiographic response and overall survival in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer receiving chemotherapy.

Authors:  Guru Sonpavde; Gregory R Pond; William R Berry; Ronald de Wit; Mario A Eisenberger; Ian F Tannock; Andrew J Armstrong
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2011-03-01       Impact factor: 6.860

7.  Biomarkers and surrogate endpoints in kidney disease.

Authors:  Erum A Hartung
Journal:  Pediatr Nephrol       Date:  2015-05-16       Impact factor: 3.714

8.  Use of the likelihood reduction factor in a path analysis framework to quantify surrogacy in clinical trials.

Authors:  Katherine Bloore; Yang Song; Howard Cabral; Joseph Massaro; Michael LaValley
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2021-09-21       Impact factor: 2.373

9.  Persistent infection with human papillomavirus 16 or 18 is strongly linked with high-grade cervical disease.

Authors:  David Radley; Alfred Saah; Margaret Stanley
Journal:  Hum Vaccin Immunother       Date:  2016-03-03       Impact factor: 3.452

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.