Comparison of Different Machine Learning Methodologies for Predicting the Non-Specific Treatment Response in Placebo Controlled Major Depressive Disorder Clinical Trials
{"title":"Comparison of Different Machine Learning Methodologies for Predicting the Non-Specific Treatment Response in Placebo Controlled Major Depressive Disorder Clinical Trials","authors":"Roberto Gomeni, Françoise Bressolle-Gomeni","doi":"10.1111/cts.70128","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Placebo effect represents a serious confounder for the assessment of treatment effect to the extent that it has become increasingly difficult to develop antidepressant medications appropriate for outperforming placebo. Treatment effect in randomized, placebo-controlled trials, is usually estimated by the mean baseline adjusted difference of treatment response in active and placebo arms and is function of treatment-specific and non-specific effects. The non-specific treatment effect varies subject by subject conditional to the individual propensity to respond to placebo. This effect is not estimable at an individual level using the conventional parallel-group study design, since each subject enrolled in the trial is assigned to receive either active treatment or placebo, but not both. The objective of this study was to conduct a comparative analysis of the machine learning methodologies to estimate the individual probability of a non-specific treatment effect. The estimated probability is expected to support novel methodological approaches for better controlling effect of excessively high placebo response. At this purpose, six machine learning methodologies (gradient boosting machine, lasso regression, logistic regression, support vector machines, <i>k</i>-nearest neighbors, and random forests) were compared to the multilayer perceptrons artificial neural network (ANN) methodology for predicting the probability of individual non-specific treatment response. ANN achieved the highest overall accuracy among all methods tested. A fivefold cross-validation was used to assess performances and risks of overfitting of the ANN model. The analysis conducted without subjects with non-specific effect indicated a significant increase of signal detection with significant increase in effect size.</p>","PeriodicalId":50610,"journal":{"name":"Cts-Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"18 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11729444/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cts-Clinical and Translational Science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cts.70128","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Placebo effect represents a serious confounder for the assessment of treatment effect to the extent that it has become increasingly difficult to develop antidepressant medications appropriate for outperforming placebo. Treatment effect in randomized, placebo-controlled trials, is usually estimated by the mean baseline adjusted difference of treatment response in active and placebo arms and is function of treatment-specific and non-specific effects. The non-specific treatment effect varies subject by subject conditional to the individual propensity to respond to placebo. This effect is not estimable at an individual level using the conventional parallel-group study design, since each subject enrolled in the trial is assigned to receive either active treatment or placebo, but not both. The objective of this study was to conduct a comparative analysis of the machine learning methodologies to estimate the individual probability of a non-specific treatment effect. The estimated probability is expected to support novel methodological approaches for better controlling effect of excessively high placebo response. At this purpose, six machine learning methodologies (gradient boosting machine, lasso regression, logistic regression, support vector machines, k-nearest neighbors, and random forests) were compared to the multilayer perceptrons artificial neural network (ANN) methodology for predicting the probability of individual non-specific treatment response. ANN achieved the highest overall accuracy among all methods tested. A fivefold cross-validation was used to assess performances and risks of overfitting of the ANN model. The analysis conducted without subjects with non-specific effect indicated a significant increase of signal detection with significant increase in effect size.
期刊介绍:
Clinical and Translational Science (CTS), an official journal of the American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, highlights original translational medicine research that helps bridge laboratory discoveries with the diagnosis and treatment of human disease. Translational medicine is a multi-faceted discipline with a focus on translational therapeutics. In a broad sense, translational medicine bridges across the discovery, development, regulation, and utilization spectrum. Research may appear as Full Articles, Brief Reports, Commentaries, Phase Forwards (clinical trials), Reviews, or Tutorials. CTS also includes invited didactic content that covers the connections between clinical pharmacology and translational medicine. Best-in-class methodologies and best practices are also welcomed as Tutorials. These additional features provide context for research articles and facilitate understanding for a wide array of individuals interested in clinical and translational science. CTS welcomes high quality, scientifically sound, original manuscripts focused on clinical pharmacology and translational science, including animal, in vitro, in silico, and clinical studies supporting the breadth of drug discovery, development, regulation and clinical use of both traditional drugs and innovative modalities.