Statistical Methods in Medical Research最新文献

Observational studies are frequently used in clinical research to estimate the effects of treatments or exposures on outcomes. To reduce the effects of confounding when estimating treatment effects, covariate balancing methods are frequently implemented. This study evaluated, using extensive Monte Carlo simulation, several methods of covariate balancing, and two methods for propensity score estimation, for estimating the average treatment effect on the treated using a hazard ratio from a Cox proportional hazards model. With respect to minimizing bias and maximizing accuracy (as measured by the mean square error) of the treatment effect, the average treatment effect on the treated weighting, fine stratification, and optimal full matching with a conventional logistic regression model for the propensity score performed best across all simulated conditions. Other methods performed well in specific circumstances, such as pair matching when sample sizes were large (n = 5000) and the proportion treated was < 0.25. Statistical power was generally higher for weighting methods than matching methods, and Type I error rates were at or below the nominal level for balancing methods with unbiased treatment effect estimates. There was also a decreasing effective sample size with an increasing number of strata, therefore for stratification-based weighting methods, it may be important to consider fewer strata. Generally, we recommend methods that performed well in our simulations, although the identification of methods that performed well is necessarily limited by the specific features of our simulation. The methods are illustrated using a real-world example comparing beta blockers and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors among hypertensive patients at risk for incident stroke.

An important task in health research is to characterize time-to-event outcomes such as disease onset or mortality in terms of a potentially high-dimensional set of risk factors. For example, prospective cohort studies of Alzheimer's disease (AD) typically enroll older adults for observation over several decades to assess the long-term impact of genetic and other factors on cognitive decline and mortality. The accelerated failure time model is particularly well-suited to such studies, structuring covariate effects as "horizontal" changes to the survival quantiles that conceptually reflect shifts in the outcome distribution due to lifelong exposures. However, this modeling task is complicated by the enrollment of adults at differing ages, and intermittent follow-up visits leading to interval-censored outcome information. Moreover, genetic and clinical risk factors are not only high-dimensional, but characterized by underlying grouping structures, such as by function or gene location. Such grouped high-dimensional covariates require shrinkage methods that directly acknowledge this structure to facilitate variable selection and estimation. In this paper, we address these considerations directly by proposing a Bayesian accelerated failure time model with a group-structured lasso penalty, designed for left-truncated and interval-censored time-to-event data. We develop an R package with a Markov chain Monte Carlo sampler for estimation. We present a simulation study examining the performance of this method relative to an ordinary lasso penalty and apply the proposed method to identify groups of predictive genetic and clinical risk factors for AD in the Religious Orders Study and Memory and Aging Project prospective cohort studies of AD and dementia.

Network meta-analysis has been used to answer a range of clinical questions about the preferred intervention for a given condition. Although the effectiveness and safety of pharmacological agents depend on the dose administered, network meta-analysis applications typically ignore the role that drugs dosage plays in the results. This leads to more heterogeneity in the network. In this paper, we present a suite of network meta-analysis models that incorporate the dose-effect relationship using restricted cubic splines. We extend existing models into a dose-effect network meta-regression to account for study-level covariates and for groups of agents in a class-effect dose-effect network meta-analysis model. We apply our models to a network of aggregate data about the efficacy of 21 antidepressants and placebo for depression. We find that all antidepressants are more efficacious than placebo after a certain dose. Also, we identify the dose level at which each antidepressant's effect exceeds that of placebo and estimate the dose beyond which the effect of antidepressants no longer increases. When covariates were introduced to the model, we find that studies with small sample size tend to exaggerate antidepressants efficacy for several of the drugs. Our dose-effect network meta-analysis model with restricted cubic splines provides a flexible approach to modelling the dose-effect relationship in multiple interventions. Decision-makers can use our model to inform treatment choice.

The selection of the primary endpoint in a clinical trial plays a critical role in determining the trial's success. Ideally, the primary endpoint is the clinically most relevant outcome, also termed the true endpoint. However, practical considerations, like extended follow-up, may complicate this choice, prompting the proposal to replace the true endpoint with so-called surrogate endpoints. Evaluating the validity of these surrogate endpoints is crucial, and a popular evaluation framework is based on the proportion of treatment effect explained (PTE). While methodological advancements in this area have focused primarily on estimation methods, interpretation remains a challenge hindering the practical use of the PTE. We review various ways to interpret the PTE. These interpretations-two causal and one non-causal-reveal connections between the PTE principal surrogacy, causal mediation analysis, and the prediction of trial-level treatment effects. A common limitation across these interpretations is the reliance on unverifiable assumptions. As such, we argue that the PTE is only meaningful when researchers are willing to make very strong assumptions. These challenges are also illustrated in an analysis of three hypothetical vaccine trials.

When the primary endpoints in randomized clinical trials require long term follow-up or are costly to measure, it is often desirable to assess treatment effects on surrogate instead of clinical endpoints. Prior to adopting a surrogate endpoint for such purposes, the extent of its surrogacy on the primary endpoint must be assessed. There is a rich statistical literature on assessing surrogacy in the overall population, much of which is based on quantifying the proportion of treatment effect on the primary endpoint that is explained by the treatment effect on the surrogate endpoint. However, the surrogacy of an endpoint may vary across different patient subgroups according to baseline demographic characteristics, and limited methods are currently available to assess overall surrogacy in the presence of potential surrogacy heterogeneity. In this paper, we propose methods that incorporate covariates for baseline information, such as age, to improve overall surrogacy assessment. We use flexible semi-non-parametric modeling strategies to adjust for covariate effects and derive a robust estimate for the proportion of treatment effect of the covariate-adjusted surrogate endpoint. Simulation results suggest that the adjusted surrogate endpoint has greater proportion of treatment effect compared to the unadjusted surrogate endpoint. We apply the proposed method to data from a clinical trial of infliximab and assess the adequacy of the surrogate endpoint in the presence of age heterogeneity.

In this paper, we focus on the modeling problem of estimating data with non-sparse structures, specifically focusing on biological data that exhibit a high degree of relevant features. Various fields, such as biology and finance, face the challenge of non-sparse estimation. We address the problems using the proposed method, called structured iterative division. Structured iterative division effectively divides data into non-sparse and sparse structures and eliminates numerous irrelevant variables, significantly reducing the error while maintaining computational efficiency. Numerical and theoretical results demonstrate the competitive advantage of the proposed method on a wide range of problems, and the proposed method exhibits excellent statistical performance in numerical comparisons with several existing methods. We apply the proposed algorithm to two biology problems, gene microarray datasets, and chimeric protein datasets, to the prognostic risk of distant metastasis in breast cancer and Alzheimer's disease, respectively. Structured iterative division provides insights into gene identification and selection, and we also provide meaningful results in anticipating cancer risk and identifying key factors.

Despite the widespread use of Cox regression for modeling treatment effects in clinical trials, in immunotherapy oncology trials and other settings therapeutic benefits are not immediately realized thereby violating the proportional hazards assumption. Weighted logrank tests and the so-called Maxcombo test involving the combination of multiple logrank test statistics have been advocated to increase power for detecting effects in these and other settings where hazards are nonproportional. We describe a testing framework based on supremum logrank statistics created by successively analyzing and excluding early events, or obtained using a moving time window. We then describe how such tests can be conducted in a group sequential trial with interim analyses conducted for potential early stopping of benefit. The crossing boundaries for the interim test statistics are determined using an easy-to-implement Monte Carlo algorithm. Numerical studies illustrate the good frequency properties of the proposed group sequential methods.

In clinical and observational studies, secondary outcomes are frequently collected alongside the primary outcome for each subject, yet their potential to improve the analysis efficiency remains underutilized. Moreover, missing data, commonly encountered in practice, can introduce bias to estimates if not appropriately addressed. This article presents an innovative approach that enhances the empirical likelihood-based information borrowing method by integrating missing-data techniques, ensuring robust data integration. We introduce a plug-in inverse probability weighting estimator to handle missingness in the primary analysis, demonstrating its equivalence to the standard joint estimator under mild conditions. To address potential bias from missing secondary outcomes, we propose a uniform mapping strategy, imputing incomplete secondary outcomes into a unified space. Extensive simulations highlight the effectiveness of our method, showing consistent, efficient, and robust estimators under various scenarios involving missing data and/or misspecified secondary models. Finally, we apply our proposal to the Uniform Data Set from the National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center, exemplifying its practical application.

In disease surveillance, capture-recapture methods are commonly used to estimate the number of diseased cases in a defined target population. Since the number of cases never identified by any surveillance system cannot be observed, estimation of the case count typically requires at least one crucial assumption about the dependency between surveillance systems. However, such assumptions are generally unverifiable based on the observed data alone. In this paper, we advocate a modeling framework hinging on the choice of a key population-level parameter that reflects dependencies among surveillance streams. With the key dependency parameter as the focus, the proposed method offers the benefits of (a) incorporating expert opinion in the spirit of prior information to guide estimation; (b) providing accessible bias corrections, and (c) leveraging an adapted credible interval approach to facilitate inference. We apply the proposed framework to two real human immunodeficiency virus surveillance datasets exhibiting three-stream and four-stream capture-recapture-based case count estimation. Our approach enables estimation of the number of human immunodeficiency virus positive cases for both examples, under realistic assumptions that are under the investigator's control and can be readily interpreted. The proposed framework also permits principled uncertainty analyses through which a user can acknowledge their level of confidence in assumptions made about the key non-identifiable dependency parameter.

In many cluster-correlated data analyses, informative cluster size poses a challenge that can potentially introduce bias in statistical analyses. Different methodologies have been introduced in statistical literature to address this bias. In this study, we consider a complex form of informativeness where the number of observations corresponding to latent levels of a unit-level continuous covariate within a cluster is associated with the response variable. This type of informativeness has not been explored in prior research. We present a novel test statistic designed to evaluate the effect of the continuous covariate while accounting for the presence of informativeness. The covariate induces a continuum of latent subgroups within the clusters, and our test statistic is formulated by aggregating values from an established statistic that accounts for informative subgroup sizes when comparing group-specific marginal distributions. Through carefully designed simulations, we compare our test with four traditional methods commonly employed in the analysis of cluster-correlated data. Only our test maintains the size across all data-generating scenarios with informativeness. We illustrate the proposed method to test for marginal associations in periodontal data with this distinctive form of informativeness.