Literature DB >> 26722639

Surrogate Endpoint Evaluation: Principal Stratification Criteria and the Prentice Definition.

Peter B Gilbert1, Erin E Gabriel2, Ying Huang1, Ivan S F Chan3.   

Abstract

A common problem of interest within a randomized clinical trial is the evaluation of an inexpensive response endpoint as a valid surrogate endpoint for a clinical endpoint, where a chief purpose of a valid surrogate is to provide a way to make correct inferences on clinical treatment effects in future studies without needing to collect the clinical endpoint data. Within the principal stratification framework for addressing this problem based on data from a single randomized clinical efficacy trial, a variety of definitions and criteria for a good surrogate endpoint have been proposed, all based on or closely related to the "principal effects" or "causal effect predictiveness (CEP)" surface. We discuss CEP-based criteria for a useful surrogate endpoint, including (1) the meaning and relative importance of proposed criteria including average causal necessity (ACN), average causal sufficiency (ACS), and large clinical effect modification; (2) the relationship between these criteria and the Prentice definition of a valid surrogate endpoint; and (3) the relationship between these criteria and the consistency criterion (i.e., assurance against the "surrogate paradox"). This includes the result that ACN plus a strong version of ACS generally do not imply the Prentice definition nor the consistency criterion, but they do have these implications in special cases. Moreover, the converse does not hold except in a special case with a binary candidate surrogate. The results highlight that assumptions about the treatment effect on the clinical endpoint before the candidate surrogate is measured are influential for the ability to draw conclusions about the Prentice definition or consistency. In addition, we emphasize that in some scenarios that occur commonly in practice, the principal strata sub-populations for inference are identifiable from the observable data, in which cases the principal stratification framework has relatively high utility for the purpose of effect modification analysis, and is closely connected to the treatment marker selection problem. The results are illustrated with application to a vaccine efficacy trial, where ACN and ACS for an antibody marker are found to be consistent with the data and hence support the Prentice definition and consistency.

Entities:  

Year:  2015        PMID: 26722639      PMCID: PMC4692254          DOI: 10.1515/jci-2014-0007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Causal Inference        ISSN: 2193-3685


  23 in total

1.  Principal stratification in causal inference.

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

2.  Use of statistical models for evaluating antibody response as a correlate of protection against varicella.

Authors:  Ivan S F Chan; Shu Li; Holly Matthews; Christina Chan; Rupert Vessey; Jerald Sadoff; Joseph Heyse
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2002-11-30       Impact factor: 2.373

3.  Commentary on "Principal stratification - a goal or a tool?" by Judea Pearl.

Authors:  Peter B Gilbert; Michael G Hudgens; Julian Wolfson
Journal:  Int J Biostat       Date:  2011-09-20       Impact factor: 0.968

4.  Principal stratification and attribution prohibition: good ideas taken too far.

Authors:  Marshall Joffe
Journal:  Int J Biostat       Date:  2011-09-14       Impact factor: 0.968

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

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

6.  A Bayesian approach to improved estimation of causal effect predictiveness for a principal surrogate endpoint.

Authors:  Corwin M Zigler; Thomas R Belin
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2012-02-20       Impact factor: 2.571

7.  Efficacy, safety, and tolerability of herpes zoster vaccine in persons aged 50-59 years.

Authors:  Kenneth E Schmader; Myron J Levin; John W Gnann; Shelly A McNeil; Timo Vesikari; Robert F Betts; Susan Keay; Jon E Stek; Nickoya D Bundick; Shu-Chih Su; Yanli Zhao; Xiaoming Li; Ivan S F Chan; Paula W Annunziato; Janie Parrino
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2012-01-30       Impact factor: 9.079

8.  Assessing treatment-selection markers using a potential outcomes framework.

Authors:  Ying Huang; Peter B Gilbert; Holly Janes
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2012-02-02       Impact factor: 2.571

9.  Surrogate measures and consistent surrogates.

Authors:  Tyler J Vanderweele
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2013-09       Impact factor: 2.571

10.  Sharpening bounds on principal effects with covariates.

Authors:  Dustin M Long; Michael G Hudgens
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2013-11-18       Impact factor: 2.571

View more
  8 in total

1.  Predicting Overall Vaccine Efficacy in a New Setting by Re-Calibrating Baseline Covariate and Intermediate Response Endpoint Effect Modifiers of Type-Specific Vaccine Efficacy.

Authors:  Peter B Gilbert; Ying Huang
Journal:  Epidemiol Methods       Date:  2016-01-23

Review 2.  Distinguishing Causation From Correlation in the Use of Correlates of Protection to Evaluate and Develop Influenza Vaccines.

Authors:  Wey Wen Lim; Nancy H L Leung; Sheena G Sullivan; Eric J Tchetgen Tchetgen; Benjamin J Cowling
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2020-03-02       Impact factor: 4.897

Review 3.  Taking stock of the present and looking ahead: envisioning challenges in the design of future HIV prevention efficacy trials.

Authors:  Holly Janes; Deborah Donnell; Peter B Gilbert; Elizabeth R Brown; Martha Nason
Journal:  Lancet HIV       Date:  2019-05-08       Impact factor: 12.767

4.  Evaluating principal surrogate markers in vaccine trials in the presence of multiphase sampling.

Authors:  Ying Huang
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2017-06-26       Impact factor: 2.571

Review 5.  Modeling HIV vaccine trials of the future.

Authors:  Peter B Gilbert; Ying Huang; Holly E Janes
Journal:  Curr Opin HIV AIDS       Date:  2016-11       Impact factor: 4.283

Review 6.  Can Biomarkers Advance HIV Research and Care in the Antiretroviral Therapy Era?

Authors:  Amy C Justice; Kristine M Erlandson; Peter W Hunt; Alan Landay; Paolo Miotti; Russell P Tracy
Journal:  J Infect Dis       Date:  2018-01-30       Impact factor: 5.226

7.  Simultaneous Inference of Treatment Effect Modification by Intermediate Response Endpoint Principal Strata with Application to Vaccine Trials.

Authors:  Yingying Zhuang; Ying Huang; Peter B Gilbert
Journal:  Int J Biostat       Date:  2019-07-02       Impact factor: 1.829

8.  Mechanistic Correlates of Protection for SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines.

Authors:  Wey Wen Lim; Benjamin J Cowling
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2022-01-01       Impact factor: 4.860

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.