Robin Ristl, Heiko Götte, Armin Schüler, Martin Posch, Franz König
{"title":"比较两个生存函数多个特征的同步推理程序。","authors":"Robin Ristl, Heiko Götte, Armin Schüler, Martin Posch, Franz König","doi":"10.1177/09622802241231497","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Survival time is the primary endpoint of many randomized controlled trials, and a treatment effect is typically quantified by the hazard ratio under the assumption of proportional hazards. Awareness is increasing that in many settings this assumption is a priori violated, for example, due to delayed onset of drug effect. In these cases, interpretation of the hazard ratio estimate is ambiguous and statistical inference for alternative parameters to quantify a treatment effect is warranted. We consider differences or ratios of milestone survival probabilities or quantiles, differences in restricted mean survival times, and an average hazard ratio to be of interest. Typically, more than one such parameter needs to be reported to assess possible treatment benefits, and in confirmatory trials, the according inferential procedures need to be adjusted for multiplicity. A simple Bonferroni adjustment may be too conservative because the different parameters of interest typically show considerable correlation. Hence simultaneous inference procedures that take into account the correlation are warranted. By using the counting process representation of the mentioned parameters, we show that their estimates are asymptotically multivariate normal and we provide an estimate for their covariance matrix. We propose according to the parametric multiple testing procedures and simultaneous confidence intervals. Also, the logrank test may be included in the framework. Finite sample type I error rate and power are studied by simulation. The methods are illustrated with an example from oncology. A software implementation is provided in the R package nph.</p>","PeriodicalId":22038,"journal":{"name":"Statistical Methods in Medical Research","volume":" ","pages":"589-610"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11025310/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Simultaneous inference procedures for the comparison of multiple characteristics of two survival functions.\",\"authors\":\"Robin Ristl, Heiko Götte, Armin Schüler, Martin Posch, Franz König\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/09622802241231497\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Survival time is the primary endpoint of many randomized controlled trials, and a treatment effect is typically quantified by the hazard ratio under the assumption of proportional hazards. Awareness is increasing that in many settings this assumption is a priori violated, for example, due to delayed onset of drug effect. In these cases, interpretation of the hazard ratio estimate is ambiguous and statistical inference for alternative parameters to quantify a treatment effect is warranted. We consider differences or ratios of milestone survival probabilities or quantiles, differences in restricted mean survival times, and an average hazard ratio to be of interest. Typically, more than one such parameter needs to be reported to assess possible treatment benefits, and in confirmatory trials, the according inferential procedures need to be adjusted for multiplicity. A simple Bonferroni adjustment may be too conservative because the different parameters of interest typically show considerable correlation. Hence simultaneous inference procedures that take into account the correlation are warranted. By using the counting process representation of the mentioned parameters, we show that their estimates are asymptotically multivariate normal and we provide an estimate for their covariance matrix. We propose according to the parametric multiple testing procedures and simultaneous confidence intervals. Also, the logrank test may be included in the framework. Finite sample type I error rate and power are studied by simulation. The methods are illustrated with an example from oncology. A software implementation is provided in the R package nph.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":22038,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Statistical Methods in Medical Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"589-610\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11025310/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Statistical Methods in Medical Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/09622802241231497\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/3/11 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Statistical Methods in Medical Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09622802241231497","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
存活时间是许多随机对照试验的主要终点,而治疗效果通常是在比例危险假设下通过危险比来量化的。越来越多的人意识到,在许多情况下,这一假设是先验违反的,例如,由于药物起效延迟。在这种情况下,对危险比估计值的解释是模糊的,因此需要通过统计推断来确定量化治疗效果的替代参数。我们认为里程碑生存概率或定量的差异或比率、受限平均生存时间的差异以及平均危险比都是值得关注的。通常情况下,需要报告一个以上的此类参数来评估可能的治疗效果,在确证试验中,需要对相应的推论程序进行多重性调整。简单的 Bonferroni 调整可能过于保守,因为不同的相关参数通常会表现出相当大的相关性。因此,需要采用考虑到相关性的同步推断程序。通过使用上述参数的计数过程表示法,我们证明了它们的估计值在渐近上是多元正态的,并提供了它们协方差矩阵的估计值。我们根据参数多重检验程序和同步置信区间提出了建议。此外,对数秩检验也可纳入该框架。通过模拟研究了有限样本 I 型错误率和功率。以肿瘤学为例对这些方法进行了说明。软件实现在 R 软件包 nph 中提供。
Simultaneous inference procedures for the comparison of multiple characteristics of two survival functions.
Survival time is the primary endpoint of many randomized controlled trials, and a treatment effect is typically quantified by the hazard ratio under the assumption of proportional hazards. Awareness is increasing that in many settings this assumption is a priori violated, for example, due to delayed onset of drug effect. In these cases, interpretation of the hazard ratio estimate is ambiguous and statistical inference for alternative parameters to quantify a treatment effect is warranted. We consider differences or ratios of milestone survival probabilities or quantiles, differences in restricted mean survival times, and an average hazard ratio to be of interest. Typically, more than one such parameter needs to be reported to assess possible treatment benefits, and in confirmatory trials, the according inferential procedures need to be adjusted for multiplicity. A simple Bonferroni adjustment may be too conservative because the different parameters of interest typically show considerable correlation. Hence simultaneous inference procedures that take into account the correlation are warranted. By using the counting process representation of the mentioned parameters, we show that their estimates are asymptotically multivariate normal and we provide an estimate for their covariance matrix. We propose according to the parametric multiple testing procedures and simultaneous confidence intervals. Also, the logrank test may be included in the framework. Finite sample type I error rate and power are studied by simulation. The methods are illustrated with an example from oncology. A software implementation is provided in the R package nph.
期刊介绍:
Statistical Methods in Medical Research is a peer reviewed scholarly journal and is the leading vehicle for articles in all the main areas of medical statistics and an essential reference for all medical statisticians. This unique journal is devoted solely to statistics and medicine and aims to keep professionals abreast of the many powerful statistical techniques now available to the medical profession. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)