Literature DB >> 21627627

A shrinkage approach for estimating a treatment effect using intermediate biomarker data in clinical trials.

Yun Li1, Jeremy M G Taylor, Roderick J A Little.   

Abstract

In clinical trials, a biomarker (S ) that is measured after randomization and is strongly associated with the true endpoint (T) can often provide information about T and hence the effect of a treatment (Z ) on T. A useful biomarker can be measured earlier than T and cost less than T. In this article, we consider the use of S as an auxiliary variable and examine the information recovery from using S for estimating the treatment effect on T, when S is completely observed and T is partially observed. In an ideal but often unrealistic setting, when S satisfies Prentice's definition for perfect surrogacy, there is the potential for substantial gain in precision by using data from S to estimate the treatment effect on T. When S is not close to a perfect surrogate, it can provide substantial information only under particular circumstances. We propose to use a targeted shrinkage regression approach that data-adaptively takes advantage of the potential efficiency gain yet avoids the need to make a strong surrogacy assumption. Simulations show that this approach strikes a balance between bias and efficiency gain. Compared with competing methods, it has better mean squared error properties and can achieve substantial efficiency gain, particularly in a common practical setting when S captures much but not all of the treatment effect and the sample size is relatively small. We apply the proposed method to a glaucoma data example.
© 2011, The International Biometric Society.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21627627      PMCID: PMC3365575          DOI: 10.1111/j.1541-0420.2011.01608.x

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


  9 in total

1.  Survival analysis using auxiliary variables via multiple imputation, with application to AIDS clinical trial data.

Authors:  Cheryl L Faucett; Nathaniel Schenker; Jeremy M G Taylor
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 2.571

2.  Properties of a nonparametric test for early comparison of treatments in clinical trials in the presence of surrogate endpoints.

Authors:  E S Venkatraman; C B Begg
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 2.571

3.  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

4.  Criteria for the validation of surrogate endpoints in randomized experiments.

Authors:  M Buyse; G Molenberghs
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1998-09       Impact factor: 2.571

Review 5.  Surrogate end points in clinical trials: are we being misled?

Authors:  T R Fleming; D L DeMets
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1996-10-01       Impact factor: 25.391

6.  Nonparametric survival estimation using prognostic longitudinal covariates.

Authors:  S Murray; A A Tsiatis
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1996-03       Impact factor: 2.571

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

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

8.  Surrogate and auxiliary endpoints in clinical trials, with potential applications in cancer and AIDS research.

Authors:  T R Fleming; R L Prentice; M S Pepe; D Glidden
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1994-05-15       Impact factor: 2.373

9.  Visual field progression in the Collaborative Initial Glaucoma Treatment Study the impact of treatment and other baseline factors.

Authors:  David C Musch; Brenda W Gillespie; Paul R Lichter; Leslie M Niziol; Nancy K Janz
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2008-11-18       Impact factor: 12.079

  9 in total
  2 in total

1.  Improving efficiency in clinical trials using auxiliary information: Application of a multi-state cure model.

Authors:  A S C Conlon; J M G Taylor; D J Sargent
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2015-01-13       Impact factor: 2.571

2.  Landmark estimation of survival and treatment effects in observational studies.

Authors:  Layla Parast; Beth Ann Griffin
Journal:  Lifetime Data Anal       Date:  2016-02-15       Impact factor: 1.588

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.