Literature DB >> 35124836

Bayesian set of best dynamic treatment regimes: Construction and sample size calculation for SMARTs with binary outcomes.

William J Artman1, Brent A Johnson1, Kevin G Lynch2, James R McKay3, Ashkan Ertefaie1.   

Abstract

Sequential, multiple assignment, randomized trials (SMARTs) compare sequences of treatment decision rules called dynamic treatment regimes (DTRs). In particular, the Adaptive Treatment for Alcohol and Cocaine Dependence (ENGAGE) SMART aimed to determine the best DTRs for patients with a substance use disorder. While many authors have focused on a single pairwise comparison, addressing the main goal involves comparisons of >2 DTRs. For complex comparisons, there is a paucity of methods for binary outcomes. We fill this gap by extending the multiple comparisons with the best (MCB) methodology to the Bayesian binary outcome setting. The set of best is constructed based on simultaneous credible intervals. A substantial challenge for power analysis is the correlation between outcome estimators for distinct DTRs embedded in SMARTs due to overlapping subjects. We address this using Robins' G-computation formula to take a weighted average of parameter draws obtained via simulation from the parameter posteriors. We use non-informative priors and work with the exact distribution of parameters avoiding unnecessary normality assumptions and specification of the correlation matrix of DTR outcome summary statistics. We conduct simulation studies for both the construction of a set of optimal DTRs using the Bayesian MCB procedure and the sample size calculation for two common SMART designs. We illustrate our method on the ENGAGE SMART. The R package SMARTbayesR for power calculations is freely available on the Comprehensive R Archive Network (CRAN) repository. An RShiny app is available at https://wilart.shinyapps.io/shinysmartbayesr/.
© 2022 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  binary outcome; dynamic treatment regimes; multiple comparisons with the best; power analysis; sequential multiple assignment randomized trials

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35124836      PMCID: PMC9363159          DOI: 10.1002/sim.9323

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stat Med        ISSN: 0277-6715            Impact factor:   2.497


  21 in total

Review 1.  Flexible treatment strategies in chronic disease: clinical and research implications.

Authors:  P W Lavori; R Dawson; A J Rush
Journal:  Biol Psychiatry       Date:  2000-09-15       Impact factor: 13.382

2.  Identifying a set that contains the best dynamic treatment regimes.

Authors:  Ashkan Ertefaie; Tianshuang Wu; Kevin G Lynch; Inbal Nahum-Shani
Journal:  Biostatistics       Date:  2015-08-03       Impact factor: 5.899

3.  Introduction to SMART designs for the development of adaptive interventions: with application to weight loss research.

Authors:  Daniel Almirall; Inbal Nahum-Shani; Nancy E Sherwood; Susan A Murphy
Journal:  Transl Behav Med       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 3.046

4.  Dynamic Treatment Regimes.

Authors:  Bibhas Chakraborty; Susan A Murphy
Journal:  Annu Rev Stat Appl       Date:  2014       Impact factor: 5.810

5.  Design and Analysis Considerations for Comparing Dynamic Treatment Regimens with Binary Outcomes from Sequential Multiple Assignment Randomized Trials.

Authors:  Kelley M Kidwell; Nicholas J Seewald; Qui Tran; Connie Kasari; Daniel Almirall
Journal:  J Appl Stat       Date:  2017-10-12       Impact factor: 1.404

Review 6.  Mechanisms of change in adolescent substance use treatment: how does treatment work?

Authors:  Jessica J Black; Tammy Chung
Journal:  Subst Abus       Date:  2014       Impact factor: 3.716

7.  A SMART data analysis method for constructing adaptive treatment strategies for substance use disorders.

Authors:  Inbal Nahum-Shani; Ashkan Ertefaie; Xi Lucy Lu; Kevin G Lynch; James R McKay; David W Oslin; Daniel Almirall
Journal:  Addiction       Date:  2017-02-18       Impact factor: 6.526

Review 8.  Recommendations for the Design and Analysis of Treatment Trials for Alcohol Use Disorders.

Authors:  Katie Witkiewitz; John W Finney; Alex H S Harris; Daniel R Kivlahan; Henry R Kranzler
Journal:  Alcohol Clin Exp Res       Date:  2015-08-06       Impact factor: 3.455

Review 9.  Continuing care research: what we have learned and where we are going.

Authors:  James R McKay
Journal:  J Subst Abuse Treat       Date:  2009-03

10.  Frequentist versus Bayesian approaches to multiple testing.

Authors:  Arvid Sjölander; Stijn Vansteelandt
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  2019-05-13       Impact factor: 8.082

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.