Literature DB >> 33021738

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

Layla Parast1, Tanya P Garcia2, Ross L Prentice3, Raymond J Carroll4,5.   

Abstract

The identification of valid surrogate markers of disease or disease progression has the potential to decrease the length and costs of future studies. Most available methods that assess the value of a surrogate marker ignore the fact that surrogates are often measured with error. Failing to adjust for measurement error can erroneously identify a useful surrogate marker as not useful or vice versa. We investigate and propose robust methods to correct for the effect of measurement error when evaluating a surrogate marker using multiple estimators developed for parametric and nonparametric estimates of the proportion of treatment effect explained by the surrogate marker. In addition, we quantify the attenuation bias induced by measurement error and develop inference procedures to allow for variance and confidence interval estimation. Through a simulation study, we show that our proposed estimators correct for measurement error in the surrogate marker and that our inference procedures perform well in finite samples. We illustrate these methods by examining a potential surrogate marker that is measured with error, hemoglobin A1c, using data from the Diabetes Prevention Program clinical trial.
© 2020 The International Biometric Society.

Entities:  

Keywords:  kernel estimation; measurement error; nonparametric; robust; surrogate marker; treatment effect

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 33021738      PMCID: PMC8021594          DOI: 10.1111/biom.13386

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biometrics        ISSN: 0006-341X            Impact factor:   1.701


  32 in total

1.  Quantifying the treatment effect explained by markers in the presence of measurement error.

Authors:  Somnath Sarkar; Yongming Qu
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2007-04-30       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  Statistical validation of intermediate endpoints for chronic diseases.

Authors:  L S Freedman; B I Graubard; A Schatzkin
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1992-01-30       Impact factor: 2.373

3.  Evaluating candidate principal surrogate endpoints.

Authors:  Peter B Gilbert; Michael G Hudgens
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2008-03-24       Impact factor: 2.571

4.  Evaluating surrogate markers of clinical outcome when measured with error.

Authors:  U G Dafni; A A Tsiatis
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1998-12       Impact factor: 2.571

5.  Herpes Simplex Virus Shedding Rate: Surrogate Outcome for Genital Herpes Recurrence Frequency and Lesion Rates, and Phase 2 Clinical Trials End Point for Evaluating Efficacy of Antivirals.

Authors:  Elfriede Agyemang; Amalia S Magaret; Stacy Selke; Christine Johnston; Larry Corey; Anna Wald
Journal:  J Infect Dis       Date:  2018-10-20       Impact factor: 5.226

Review 6.  Measurement error in biomarkers: sources, assessment, and impact on studies.

Authors:  Emily White
Journal:  IARC Sci Publ       Date:  2011

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.  National Cholesterol Education Program recommendations for triglyceride measurement: executive summary. The National Cholesterol Education Program Working Group on Lipoprotein Measurement.

Authors:  E A Stein; G L Myers
Journal:  Clin Chem       Date:  1995-10       Impact factor: 8.327

9.  Considerations for analysis of time-to-event outcomes measured with error: Bias and correction with SIMEX.

Authors:  Eric J Oh; Bryan E Shepherd; Thomas Lumley; Pamela A Shaw
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2017-11-29       Impact factor: 2.373

10.  Within-subject variation in CD4 lymphocyte count in asymptomatic human immunodeficiency virus infection: implications for patient monitoring.

Authors:  M D Hughes; D S Stein; H M Gundacker; F T Valentine; J P Phair; P A Volberding
Journal:  J Infect Dis       Date:  1994-01       Impact factor: 5.226

View more
  1 in total

1.  Concordance Between Point-of-Care Urine Ethyl Glucuronide Alcohol Tests and Self-Reported Alcohol Use in Persons with HIV in Uganda.

Authors:  Karl C Alcover; Nneka I Emenyonu; Robin Fatch; Allen Kekibiina; Kara Marson; Gabriel Chamie; Winnie R Muyindike; Brian Beesiga; Moses R Kamya; Sara Lodi; Jeremy C Kane; Judith A Hahn; Michael G McDonell
Journal:  AIDS Behav       Date:  2022-02-01
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.