Literature DB >> 23824930

Comparison of methods for estimating the effect of salvage therapy in prostate cancer when treatment is given by indication.

Jeremy M G Taylor1, Jincheng Shen, Edward H Kennedy, Lu Wang, Douglas E Schaubel.   

Abstract

For patients who were previously treated for prostate cancer, salvage hormone therapy is frequently given when the longitudinal marker prostate-specific antigen begins to rise during follow-up. Because the treatment is given by indication, estimating the effect of the hormone therapy is challenging. In a previous paper we described two methods for estimating the treatment effect, called two-stage and sequential stratification. The two-stage method involved modeling the longitudinal and survival data. The sequential stratification method involves contrasts within matched sets of people, where each matched set includes people who did and did not receive hormone therapy. In this paper, we evaluate the properties of these two methods and compare and contrast them with the marginal structural model methodology. The marginal structural model methodology involves a weighted survival analysis, where the weights are derived from models for the time of hormone therapy. We highlight the different conditional and marginal interpretations of the quantities being estimated by the three methods. Using simulations that mimic the prostate cancer setting, we evaluate bias, efficiency, and accuracy of estimated standard errors and robustness to modeling assumptions. The results show differences between the methods in terms of the quantities being estimated and in efficiency. We also demonstrate how the results of a randomized trial of salvage hormone therapy are strongly influenced by the design of the study and discuss how the findings from using the three methodologies can be used to infer the results of a trial.
Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  causal effect; proportional hazards model; prostate cancer; time-dependent confounder; treatment by indication

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23824930      PMCID: PMC3865083          DOI: 10.1002/sim.5890

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stat Med        ISSN: 0277-6715            Impact factor:   2.373


  19 in total

1.  Estimating causal effects from epidemiological data.

Authors:  Miguel A Hernán; James M Robins
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  2006-07       Impact factor: 3.710

2.  History-adjusted marginal structural models for estimating time-varying effect modification.

Authors:  Maya L Petersen; Steven G Deeks; Jeffrey N Martin; Mark J van der Laan
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2007-09-17       Impact factor: 4.897

3.  Intervening on risk factors for coronary heart disease: an application of the parametric g-formula.

Authors:  Sarah L Taubman; James M Robins; Murray A Mittleman; Miguel A Hernán
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2009-04-23       Impact factor: 7.196

4.  Comment: Demystifying Double Robustness: A Comparison of Alternative Strategies for Estimating a Population Mean from Incomplete Data.

Authors:  Anastasios A Tsiatis; Marie Davidian
Journal:  Stat Sci       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 2.901

5.  A sequential stratification method for estimating the effect of a time-dependent experimental treatment in observational studies.

Authors:  Douglas E Schaubel; Robert A Wolfe; Friedrich K Port
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 2.571

6.  The effect of salvage therapy on survival in a longitudinal study with treatment by indication.

Authors:  Edward H Kennedy; Jeremy M G Taylor; Douglas E Schaubel; Scott Williams
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2010-11-10       Impact factor: 2.373

7.  A simulation study of finite-sample properties of marginal structural Cox proportional hazards models.

Authors:  Daniel Westreich; Stephen R Cole; Enrique F Schisterman; Robert W Platt
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2012-04-11       Impact factor: 2.373

8.  Real-time individual predictions of prostate cancer recurrence using joint models.

Authors:  Jeremy M G Taylor; Yongseok Park; Donna P Ankerst; Cecile Proust-Lima; Scott Williams; Larry Kestin; Kyoungwha Bae; Tom Pickles; Howard Sandler
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2013-02-04       Impact factor: 2.571

9.  Constructing inverse probability weights for marginal structural models.

Authors:  Stephen R Cole; Miguel A Hernán
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2008-08-05       Impact factor: 4.897

10.  Causality, mediation and time: a dynamic viewpoint.

Authors:  Odd O Aalen; Kjetil Røysland; Jon Michael Gran; Bruno Ledergerber
Journal:  J R Stat Soc Ser A Stat Soc       Date:  2012-10       Impact factor: 2.483

View more
  5 in total

1.  Comparison of Statistical Approaches for Dealing With Immortal Time Bias in Drug Effectiveness Studies.

Authors:  Mohammad Ehsanul Karim; Paul Gustafson; John Petkau; Helen Tremlett
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2016-07-25       Impact factor: 4.897

2.  Comparison of statistical approaches dealing with time-dependent confounding in drug effectiveness studies.

Authors:  Mohammad Ehsanul Karim; John Petkau; Paul Gustafson; Robert W Platt; Helen Tremlett
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2016-09-21       Impact factor: 3.021

3.  Estimation of the optimal regime in treatment of prostate cancer recurrence from observational data using flexible weighting models.

Authors:  Jincheng Shen; Lu Wang; Jeremy M G Taylor
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2016-11-28       Impact factor: 2.571

4.  A Framework for Treatment Decision Making at Prostate Cancer Recurrence.

Authors:  Jane M Lange; Bruce J Trock; Roman Gulati; Ruth Etzioni
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2017-05-31       Impact factor: 2.583

Review 5.  Matching with time-dependent treatments: A review and look forward.

Authors:  Laine E Thomas; Siyun Yang; Daniel Wojdyla; Douglas E Schaubel
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2020-04-03       Impact factor: 2.373

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.