Simultaneous inference procedures for the comparison of multiple characteristics of two survival functions
Authors:
Robin Ristl,
Heiko Götte,
Armin Schüler,
Martin Posch,
Franz König
Abstract:
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, e.g. due to delayed onset of drug effect. In these cases, interpretation of the hazard ratio estimate is ambiguous and statisti…
▽ More
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, e.g. 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. By using the counting process representation of the mentioned parameters, we show that their estimates are asymptotically multivariate normal and we propose according 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.
△ Less
Submitted 3 October, 2023;
originally announced October 2023.
Implementation and pratical aspects of quantitative decision-making in clinical drug development
Authors:
Juan J. Abellan,
Nicolas Bonnet,
Alex Carlton,
Paul Frewer,
Heiko Götte,
John-Philip Lawo,
Jesper Madsen,
Oliver Sailer,
Guido Thömmes,
Gaëlle Saint-Hilary
Abstract:
Quantitative decision-making (QDM) principles address the issues related to the map** of results to decisions, the synthesis of information and the quantification of uncertainty. Since the clinical drug development involves a succession of decisions to be made, QDM methods can be applied at various levels. At the study level, it can be used to properly design a study, and improve the decisions t…
▽ More
Quantitative decision-making (QDM) principles address the issues related to the map** of results to decisions, the synthesis of information and the quantification of uncertainty. Since the clinical drug development involves a succession of decisions to be made, QDM methods can be applied at various levels. At the study level, it can be used to properly design a study, and improve the decisions that are made either during the trial or at its end. Establishing decision criteria ahead of the study is essential here to address the need for speedy decisions, potentially in real time. At the project level, QDM can be used to inform decisions to continue, adapt or stop a drug development programme based on results from previous studies. At the portfolio level, QDM can be used to choose, prioritise and optimise the development portfolio, e.g. using the probability to reach market access or target sales within a predefined timeline. The increasing interest in QDM and its statistical nature led in 2017 to the development a cross-industry and academia Special Interest Group on QDM within the Society and the European Federation of Statisticians in the Pharmaceutical Industry (PSI and EFSPI). The activities of the group included discussing QDM examples, some published in the literature and some real anonymised ones covering several settings. While the methodologies, and to some extent the terminology, employed also varied depending on the context, discussions within the group distilled common principles to be considered when implementing QDM, particularly around the construction of QDM frameworks, assessment of operating characteristics and communication with the clinical team. The present manuscript presents those points to consider, ho** they can be helpful to statisticians interested in implementing QDM.
△ Less
Submitted 16 July, 2022;
originally announced July 2022.
