Literature DB >> 25736915

Detecting treatment-covariate interactions using permutation methods.

Rui Wang1, David A Schoenfeld, Bettina Hoeppner, A Eden Evins.   

Abstract

The primary objective of a Randomized Clinical Trial usually is to investigate whether one treatment is better than its alternatives on average. However, treatment effects may vary across different patient subpopulations. In contrast to demonstrating one treatment is superior to another on the average sense, one is often more concerned with the question that, for a particular patient, or a group of patients with similar characteristics, which treatment strategy is most appropriate to achieve a desired outcome. Various interaction tests have been proposed to detect treatment effect heterogeneity; however, they typically examine covariates one at a time, do not offer an integrated approach that incorporates all available information, and can greatly increase the chance of a false positive finding when the number of covariates is large. We propose a new permutation test for the null hypothesis of no interaction effects for any covariate. The proposed test allows us to consider the interaction effects of many covariates simultaneously without having to group subjects into subsets based on pre-specified criteria and applies generally to randomized clinical trials of multiple treatments. The test provides an attractive alternative to the standard likelihood ratio test, especially when the number of covariates is large. We illustrate the proposed methods using a dataset from the Treatment of Adolescents with Depression Study.
Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  interactions; multiple covariates; permutation methods; subgroup analysis; variable selection

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25736915      PMCID: PMC4420688          DOI: 10.1002/sim.6457

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


  20 in total

1.  A graphical method to assess treatment-covariate interactions using the Cox model on subsets of the data.

Authors:  M Bonetti; R D Gelber
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2000-10-15       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  The mean does not mean as much anymore: finding sub-groups for tailored therapeutics.

Authors:  Stephen J Ruberg; Lei Chen; Yanping Wang
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2010-07-28       Impact factor: 2.486

3.  Permutation tests for random effects in linear mixed models.

Authors:  Oliver E Lee; Thomas M Braun
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2011-09-27       Impact factor: 2.571

4.  Analysis of randomized comparative clinical trial data for personalized treatment selections.

Authors:  Tianxi Cai; Lu Tian; Peggy H Wong; L J Wei
Journal:  Biostatistics       Date:  2010-09-28       Impact factor: 5.899

5.  Subgroup identification from randomized clinical trial data.

Authors:  Jared C Foster; Jeremy M G Taylor; Stephen J Ruberg
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2011-08-04       Impact factor: 2.373

6.  Limitations of applying summary results of clinical trials to individual patients: the need for risk stratification.

Authors:  David M Kent; Rodney A Hayward
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2007-09-12       Impact factor: 56.272

7.  Treating individuals 3: from subgroups to individuals: general principles and the example of carotid endarterectomy.

Authors:  Peter M Rothwell; Ziyah Mehta; Sally C Howard; Sergei A Gutnikov; Charles P Warlow
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2005 Jan 15-21       Impact factor: 79.321

8.  Assessing apparent treatment--covariate interactions in randomized clinical trials.

Authors:  D P Byar
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1985 Jul-Sep       Impact factor: 2.373

9.  Regularization Paths for Generalized Linear Models via Coordinate Descent.

Authors:  Jerome Friedman; Trevor Hastie; Rob Tibshirani
Journal:  J Stat Softw       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 6.440

10.  Fluoxetine, cognitive-behavioral therapy, and their combination for adolescents with depression: Treatment for Adolescents With Depression Study (TADS) randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  John March; Susan Silva; Stephen Petrycki; John Curry; Karen Wells; John Fairbank; Barbara Burns; Marisa Domino; Steven McNulty; Benedetto Vitiello; Joanne Severe
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2004-08-18       Impact factor: 56.272

View more
  3 in total

1.  Generated effect modifiers (GEM's) in randomized clinical trials.

Authors:  Eva Petkova; Thaddeus Tarpey; Zhe Su; R Todd Ogden
Journal:  Biostatistics       Date:  2016-07-27       Impact factor: 5.899

2.  The use of permutation tests for the analysis of parallel and stepped-wedge cluster-randomized trials.

Authors:  Rui Wang; Victor De Gruttola
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2017-05-02       Impact factor: 2.373

3.  The Predictive Approaches to Treatment effect Heterogeneity (PATH) Statement.

Authors:  David M Kent; Jessica K Paulus; David van Klaveren; Ralph D'Agostino; Steve Goodman; Rodney Hayward; John P A Ioannidis; Bray Patrick-Lake; Sally Morton; Michael Pencina; Gowri Raman; Joseph S Ross; Harry P Selker; Ravi Varadhan; Andrew Vickers; John B Wong; Ewout W Steyerberg
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2019-11-12       Impact factor: 25.391

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.