Literature DB >> 28088843

Evaluating surrogate marker information using censored data.

Layla Parast1, Tianxi Cai2, Lu Tian3.   

Abstract

Given the long follow-up periods that are often required for treatment or intervention studies, the potential to use surrogate markers to decrease the required follow-up time is a very attractive goal. However, previous studies have shown that using inadequate markers or making inappropriate assumptions about the relationship between the primary outcome and surrogate marker can lead to inaccurate conclusions regarding the treatment effect. Currently available methods for identifying and validating surrogate markers tend to rely on restrictive model assumptions and/or focus on uncensored outcomes. The ability to use such methods in practice when the primary outcome of interest is a time-to-event outcome is difficult because of censoring and missing surrogate information among those who experience the primary outcome before surrogate marker measurement. In this paper, we propose a novel definition of the proportion of treatment effect explained by surrogate information collected up to a specified time in the setting of a time-to-event primary outcome. Our proposed approach accommodates a setting where individuals may experience the primary outcome before the surrogate marker is measured. We propose a robust non-parametric procedure to estimate the defined quantity using censored data and use a perturbation-resampling procedure for variance estimation. Simulation studies demonstrate that the proposed procedures perform well in finite samples. We illustrate the proposed procedures by investigating two potential surrogate markers for diabetes using data from the Diabetes Prevention Program.
Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  non-parametric methods; robust procedures; smoothing; survival analysis

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28088843      PMCID: PMC5413393          DOI: 10.1002/sim.7220

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


  31 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.  Early revascularization and long-term survival in cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction.

Authors:  Judith S Hochman; Lynn A Sleeper; John G Webb; Vladimir Dzavik; Christopher E Buller; Philip Aylward; Jacques Col; Harvey D White
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2006-06-07       Impact factor: 56.272

3.  Efficiency improvement in a class of survival models through model-free covariate incorporation.

Authors:  Tanya P Garcia; Yanyuan Ma; Guosheng Yin
Journal:  Lifetime Data Anal       Date:  2011-04-01       Impact factor: 1.588

4.  Moving beyond the hazard ratio in quantifying the between-group difference in survival analysis.

Authors:  Hajime Uno; Brian Claggett; Lu Tian; Eisuke Inoue; Paul Gallo; Toshio Miyata; Deborah Schrag; Masahiro Takeuchi; Yoshiaki Uyama; Lihui Zhao; Hicham Skali; Scott Solomon; Susanna Jacobus; Michael Hughes; Milton Packer; Lee-Jen Wei
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2014-06-30       Impact factor: 44.544

5.  Surrogacy marker paradox measures in meta-analytic settings.

Authors:  Michael R Elliott; Anna S C Conlon; Yun Li; Nico Kaciroti; Jeremy M G Taylor
Journal:  Biostatistics       Date:  2014-09-17       Impact factor: 5.899

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

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

7.  The Diabetes Prevention Program. Design and methods for a clinical trial in the prevention of type 2 diabetes.

Authors: 
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  1999-04       Impact factor: 19.112

8.  Surrogate measures and consistent surrogates.

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

9.  Comparing and combining biomarkers as principal surrogates for time-to-event clinical endpoints.

Authors:  Erin E Gabriel; Michael C Sachs; Peter B Gilbert
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2014-10-28       Impact factor: 2.373

10.  Patient survival after D1 and D2 resections for gastric cancer: long-term results of the MRC randomized surgical trial. Surgical Co-operative Group.

Authors:  A Cuschieri; S Weeden; J Fielding; J Bancewicz; J Craven; V Joypaul; M Sydes; P Fayers
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 7.640

View more
  10 in total

1.  Evaluation of longitudinal surrogate markers.

Authors:  Denis Agniel; Layla Parast
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2020-06-22       Impact factor: 2.571

2.  Assessing the value of a censored surrogate outcome.

Authors:  Layla Parast; Lu Tian; Tianxi Cai
Journal:  Lifetime Data Anal       Date:  2019-04-12       Impact factor: 1.588

3.  Using a surrogate marker for early testing of a treatment effect.

Authors:  Layla Parast; Tianxi Cai; Lu Tian
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2019-04-22       Impact factor: 2.571

4.  Estimation of the proportion of treatment effect explained by a high-dimensional surrogate.

Authors:  Ruixuan Rachel Zhou; Sihai Dave Zhao; Layla Parast
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2022-02-21       Impact factor: 2.497

5.  Testing for heterogeneity in the utility of a surrogate marker.

Authors:  Layla Parast; Tianxi Cai; Lu Tian
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2021-12-07       Impact factor: 1.701

6.  Counterfactual mediation analysis in the multistate model framework for surrogate and clinical time-to-event outcomes in randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Isabelle R Weir; Jennifer R Rider; Ludovic Trinquart
Journal:  Pharm Stat       Date:  2021-08-04       Impact factor: 1.894

7.  Quantifying the feasibility of shortening clinical trial duration using surrogate markers.

Authors:  Xuan Wang; Tianxi Cai; Lu Tian; Florence Bourgeois; Layla Parast
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2021-09-02       Impact factor: 2.373

8.  Quantifying direct and indirect effect for longitudinal mediator and survival outcome using joint modeling approach.

Authors:  Cheng Zheng; Lei Liu
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2021-05-04       Impact factor: 1.701

9.  Evaluating multiple surrogate markers with censored data.

Authors:  Layla Parast; Tianxi Cai; Lu Tian
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2020-09-22       Impact factor: 2.571

10.  Robust methods to correct for measurement error when evaluating a surrogate marker.

Authors:  Layla Parast; Tanya P Garcia; Ross L Prentice; Raymond J Carroll
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2020-10-16       Impact factor: 1.701

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.