Literature DB >> 19673864

A bayesian approach to surrogacy assessment using principal stratification in clinical trials.

Yun Li1, Jeremy M G Taylor, Michael R Elliott.   

Abstract

A surrogate marker (S) is a variable that can be measured earlier and often more easily than the true endpoint (T) in a clinical trial. Most previous research has been devoted to developing surrogacy measures to quantify how well S can replace T or examining the use of S in predicting the effect of a treatment (Z). However, the research often requires one to fit models for the distribution of T given S and Z. It is well known that such models do not have causal interpretations because the models condition on a postrandomization variable S. In this article, we directly model the relationship among T, S, and Z using a potential outcomes framework introduced by Frangakis and Rubin (2002, Biometrics 58, 21-29). We propose a Bayesian estimation method to evaluate the causal probabilities associated with the cross-classification of the potential outcomes of S and T when S and T are both binary. We use a log-linear model to directly model the association between the potential outcomes of S and T through the odds ratios. The quantities derived from this approach always have causal interpretations. However, this causal model is not identifiable from the data without additional assumptions. To reduce the nonidentifiability problem and increase the precision of statistical inferences, we assume monotonicity and incorporate prior belief that is plausible in the surrogate context by using prior distributions. We also explore the relationship among the surrogacy measures based on traditional models and this counterfactual model. The method is applied to the data from a glaucoma treatment study.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19673864      PMCID: PMC3365598          DOI: 10.1111/j.1541-0420.2009.01303.x

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


  20 in total

1.  Latent class model diagnosis.

Authors:  E S Garrett; S L Zeger
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2000-12       Impact factor: 2.571

2.  Principal stratification in causal inference.

Authors:  Constantine E Frangakis; Donald B Rubin
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 2.571

3.  The validation of surrogate endpoints in meta-analyses of randomized experiments.

Authors:  M Buyse; G Molenberghs; T Burzykowski; D Renard; H Geys
Journal:  Biostatistics       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 5.899

4.  A measure of the proportion of treatment effect explained by a surrogate marker.

Authors:  Yue Wang; Jeremy M G Taylor
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 2.571

5.  Identifiability and exchangeability for direct and indirect effects.

Authors:  J M Robins; S Greenland
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  1992-03       Impact factor: 4.822

6.  Counterfactual links to the proportion of treatment effect explained by a surrogate marker.

Authors:  Jeremy M G Taylor; Yue Wang; Rodolphe Thiébaut
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 2.571

7.  Bayesian sensitivity analysis for unmeasured confounding in observational studies.

Authors:  Lawrence C McCandless; Paul Gustafson; Adrian Levy
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2007-05-20       Impact factor: 2.373

8.  Surrogate marker evaluation from an information theory perspective.

Authors:  Ariel Alonso; Geert Molenberghs
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 2.571

9.  Related causal frameworks for surrogate outcomes.

Authors:  Marshall M Joffe; Tom Greene
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 2.571

10.  Surrogate endpoints in clinical trials: definition and operational criteria.

Authors:  R L Prentice
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1989-04       Impact factor: 2.373

View more
  29 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.  Is blood pressure reduction a valid surrogate endpoint for stroke prevention? An analysis incorporating a systematic review of randomised controlled trials, a by-trial weighted errors-in-variables regression, the surrogate threshold effect (STE) and the Biomarker-Surrogacy (BioSurrogate) Evaluation Schema (BSES).

Authors:  Marissa N Lassere; Kent R Johnson; Michal Schiff; David Rees
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2012-03-12       Impact factor: 4.615

3.  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

4.  Augmented trial designs for evaluation of principal surrogates.

Authors:  Erin E Gabriel; Dean Follmann
Journal:  Biostatistics       Date:  2016-01-28       Impact factor: 5.899

5.  Evaluating principal surrogate endpoints with time-to-event data accounting for time-varying treatment efficacy.

Authors:  Erin E Gabriel; Peter B Gilbert
Journal:  Biostatistics       Date:  2013-12-13       Impact factor: 5.899

6.  Surrogacy assessment using principal stratification when surrogate and outcome measures are multivariate normal.

Authors:  Anna S C Conlon; Jeremy M G Taylor; Michael R Elliott
Journal:  Biostatistics       Date:  2013-11-26       Impact factor: 5.899

7.  A causal framework for surrogate endpoints with semi-competing risks data.

Authors:  Debashis Ghosh
Journal:  Stat Probab Lett       Date:  2012-06-16       Impact factor: 0.870

8.  Principal stratification--uses and limitations.

Authors:  Tyler J Vanderweele
Journal:  Int J Biostat       Date:  2011-07-11       Impact factor: 0.968

9.  Inference on treatment effect modification by biomarker response in a three-phase sampling design.

Authors:  Michal Juraska; Ying Huang; Peter B Gilbert
Journal:  Biostatistics       Date:  2020-07-01       Impact factor: 5.899

10.  Surrogacy assessment using principal stratification with multivariate normal and Gaussian copula models.

Authors:  Jeremy M G Taylor; Anna S C Conlon; Michael R Elliott
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2014-12-09       Impact factor: 2.486

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.