-
A Generalized Logrank-type Test for Comparison of Treatment Regimes in Sequential Multiple Assignment Randomized Trials
Authors:
Anastasios A. Tsiatis,
Marie Davidian
Abstract:
The sequential multiple assignment randomized trial (SMART) is the ideal study design for the evaluation of multistage treatment regimes, which comprise sequential decision rules that recommend treatments for a patient at each of a series of decision points based on their evolving characteristics. A common goal is to compare the set of so-called embedded regimes represented in the design on the ba…
▽ More
The sequential multiple assignment randomized trial (SMART) is the ideal study design for the evaluation of multistage treatment regimes, which comprise sequential decision rules that recommend treatments for a patient at each of a series of decision points based on their evolving characteristics. A common goal is to compare the set of so-called embedded regimes represented in the design on the basis of a primary outcome of interest. In the study of chronic diseases and disorders, this outcome is often a time to an event, and a goal is to compare the distributions of the time-to-event outcome associated with each regime in the set. We present a general statistical framework in which we develop a logrank-type test for comparison of the survival distributions associated with regimes within a specified set based on the data from a SMART with an arbitrary number of stages that allows incorporation of covariate information to enhance efficiency and can also be used with data from an observational study. The framework provides clarification of the assumptions required to yield a principled test procedure, and the proposed test subsumes or offers an improved alternative to existing methods. We demonstrate performance of the methods in a suite of simulation studies. The methods are applied to a SMART in patients with acute promyelocytic leukemia.
△ Less
Submitted 14 May, 2024; v1 submitted 25 March, 2024;
originally announced March 2024.
-
Group sequential methods for interim monitoring of randomized clinical trials with time-lagged outcome
Authors:
Anastasios A. Tsiatis,
Marie Davidian
Abstract:
The primary analysis in two-arm clinical trials usually involves inference on a scalar treatment effect parameter; e.g., depending on the outcome, the difference of treatment-specific means, risk difference, risk ratio, or odds ratio. Most clinical trials are monitored for the possibility of early stop**. Because ordinarily the outcome on any given subject can be ascertained only after some time…
▽ More
The primary analysis in two-arm clinical trials usually involves inference on a scalar treatment effect parameter; e.g., depending on the outcome, the difference of treatment-specific means, risk difference, risk ratio, or odds ratio. Most clinical trials are monitored for the possibility of early stop**. Because ordinarily the outcome on any given subject can be ascertained only after some time lag, at the time of an interim analysis, among the subjects already enrolled, the outcome is known for only a subset and is effectively censored for those who have not been enrolled sufficiently long for it to be observed. Typically, the interim analysis is based only on the data from subjects for whom the outcome has been ascertained. A goal of an interim analysis is to stop the trial as soon as the evidence is strong enough to do so, suggesting that the analysis ideally should make the most efficient use of all available data, thus including information on censoring as well as other baseline and time-dependent covariates in a principled way. A general group sequential framework is proposed for clinical trials with a time-lagged outcome. Treatment effect estimators that take account of censoring and incorporate covariate information at an interim analysis are derived using semiparametric theory and are demonstrated to lead to stronger evidence for early stop** than standard approaches. The associated test statistics are shown to have the independent increments structure, so that standard software can be used to obtain stop** boundaries.
△ Less
Submitted 22 April, 2022;
originally announced April 2022.
-
Estimation of the odds ratio in a proportional odds model with censored time-lagged outcome in a randomized clinical trial
Authors:
Anastasios A. Tsiatis,
Marie Davidian,
Shannon T. Holloway
Abstract:
In many randomized clinical trials of therapeutics for COVID-19, the primary outcome is an ordinal categorical variable, and interest focuses on the odds ratio (active agent vs. control) under the assumption of a proportional odds model. Although at the final analysis the outcome will be determined for all subjects, at an interim analysis, the status of some participants may not yet be determined,…
▽ More
In many randomized clinical trials of therapeutics for COVID-19, the primary outcome is an ordinal categorical variable, and interest focuses on the odds ratio (active agent vs. control) under the assumption of a proportional odds model. Although at the final analysis the outcome will be determined for all subjects, at an interim analysis, the status of some participants may not yet be determined, e.g., because ascertainment of the outcome may not be possible until some pre-specified follow-up time. Accordingly, the outcome from these subjects can be viewed as censored. A valid interim analysis can be based on data only from those subjects with full follow up; however, this approach is inefficient, as it does not exploit additional information that may be available on those for whom the outcome is not yet available at the time of the interim analysis. Appealing to the theory of semiparametrics, we propose an estimator for the odds ratio in a proportional odds model with censored, time-lagged categorical outcome that incorporates additional baseline and time-dependent covariate information and demonstrate that it can result in considerable gains in efficiency relative to simpler approaches. A byproduct of the approach is a covariate-adjusted estimator for the odds ratio based on the full data that would be available at a final analysis.
△ Less
Submitted 24 August, 2021; v1 submitted 29 June, 2021;
originally announced June 2021.
-
Estimating Vaccine Efficacy Over Time After a Randomized Study is Unblinded
Authors:
Anastasios A. Tsiatis,
Marie Davidian
Abstract:
The COVID-19 pandemic due to the novel coronavirus SARS CoV-2 has inspired remarkable breakthroughs in development of vaccines against the virus and the launch of several phase 3 vaccine trials in Summer 2020 to evaluate vaccine efficacy (VE). Trials of vaccine candidates using mRNA delivery systems developed by Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna have shown substantial VEs of 94-95%, leading the US Food…
▽ More
The COVID-19 pandemic due to the novel coronavirus SARS CoV-2 has inspired remarkable breakthroughs in development of vaccines against the virus and the launch of several phase 3 vaccine trials in Summer 2020 to evaluate vaccine efficacy (VE). Trials of vaccine candidates using mRNA delivery systems developed by Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna have shown substantial VEs of 94-95%, leading the US Food and Drug Administration to issue Emergency Use Authorizations and subsequent widespread administration of the vaccines. As the trials continue, a key issue is the possibility that VE may wane over time. Ethical considerations dictate that all trial participants be unblinded and those randomized to placebo be offered vaccine, leading to trial protocol amendments specifying unblinding strategies. Crossover of placebo subjects to vaccine complicates inference on waning of VE. We focus on the particular features of the Moderna trial and propose a statistical framework based on a potential outcomes formulation within which we develop methods for inference on whether or not VE wanes over time and estimation of VE at any post-vaccination time. The framework clarifies assumptions made regarding individual- and population-level phenomena and acknowledges the possibility that subjects who are more or less likely to become infected may be crossed over to vaccine differentially over time. The principles of the framework can be adapted straightforwardly to other trials.
△ Less
Submitted 24 February, 2021;
originally announced February 2021.
-
Sample Size Calculations for SMARTs
Authors:
Eric J. Rose,
Eric B. Laber,
Marie Davidian,
Anastasios A. Tsiatis,
Ying-Qi Zhao,
Michael R. Kosorok
Abstract:
Sequential Multiple Assignment Randomized Trials (SMARTs) are considered the gold standard for estimation and evaluation of treatment regimes. SMARTs are typically sized to ensure sufficient power for a simple comparison, e.g., the comparison of two fixed treatment sequences. Estimation of an optimal treatment regime is conducted as part of a secondary and hypothesis-generating analysis with forma…
▽ More
Sequential Multiple Assignment Randomized Trials (SMARTs) are considered the gold standard for estimation and evaluation of treatment regimes. SMARTs are typically sized to ensure sufficient power for a simple comparison, e.g., the comparison of two fixed treatment sequences. Estimation of an optimal treatment regime is conducted as part of a secondary and hypothesis-generating analysis with formal evaluation of the estimated optimal regime deferred to a follow-up trial. However, running a follow-up trial to evaluate an estimated optimal treatment regime is costly and time-consuming; furthermore, the estimated optimal regime that is to be evaluated in such a follow-up trial may be far from optimal if the original trial was underpowered for estimation of an optimal regime. We derive sample size procedures for a SMART that ensure: (i) sufficient power for comparing the optimal treatment regime with standard of care; and (ii) the estimated optimal regime is within a given tolerance of the true optimal regime with high-probability. We establish asymptotic validity of the proposed procedures and demonstrate their finite sample performance in a series of simulation experiments.
△ Less
Submitted 16 June, 2019;
originally announced June 2019.
-
Interpretable Dynamic Treatment Regimes
Authors:
Yichi Zhang,
Eric B. Laber,
Anastasios Tsiatis,
Marie Davidian
Abstract:
Precision medicine is currently a topic of great interest in clinical and intervention science. One way to formalize precision medicine is through a treatment regime, which is a sequence of decision rules, one per stage of clinical intervention, that map up-to-date patient information to a recommended treatment. An optimal treatment regime is defined as maximizing the mean of some cumulative clini…
▽ More
Precision medicine is currently a topic of great interest in clinical and intervention science. One way to formalize precision medicine is through a treatment regime, which is a sequence of decision rules, one per stage of clinical intervention, that map up-to-date patient information to a recommended treatment. An optimal treatment regime is defined as maximizing the mean of some cumulative clinical outcome if applied to a population of interest. It is well-known that even under simple generative models an optimal treatment regime can be a highly nonlinear function of patient information. Consequently, a focal point of recent methodological research has been the development of flexible models for estimating optimal treatment regimes. However, in many settings, estimation of an optimal treatment regime is an exploratory analysis intended to generate new hypotheses for subsequent research and not to directly dictate treatment to new patients. In such settings, an estimated treatment regime that is interpretable in a domain context may be of greater value than an unintelligible treatment regime built using "black-box" estimation methods. We propose an estimator of an optimal treatment regime composed of a sequence of decision rules, each expressible as a list of "if-then" statements that can be presented as either a paragraph or as a simple flowchart that is immediately interpretable to domain experts. The discreteness of these lists precludes smooth, i.e., gradient-based, methods of estimation and leads to non-standard asymptotics. Nevertheless, we provide a computationally efficient estimation algorithm, prove consistency of the proposed estimator, and derive rates of convergence. We illustrate the proposed methods using a series of simulation examples and application to data from a sequential clinical trial on bipolar disorder.
△ Less
Submitted 5 June, 2016;
originally announced June 2016.
-
Using Decision Lists to Construct Interpretable and Parsimonious Treatment Regimes
Authors:
Yichi Zhang,
Eric B. Laber,
Anastasios Tsiatis,
Marie Davidian
Abstract:
A treatment regime formalizes personalized medicine as a function from individual patient characteristics to a recommended treatment. A high-quality treatment regime can improve patient outcomes while reducing cost, resource consumption, and treatment burden. Thus, there is tremendous interest in estimating treatment regimes from observational and randomized studies. However, the development of tr…
▽ More
A treatment regime formalizes personalized medicine as a function from individual patient characteristics to a recommended treatment. A high-quality treatment regime can improve patient outcomes while reducing cost, resource consumption, and treatment burden. Thus, there is tremendous interest in estimating treatment regimes from observational and randomized studies. However, the development of treatment regimes for application in clinical practice requires the long-term, joint effort of statisticians and clinical scientists. In this collaborative process, the statistician must integrate clinical science into the statistical models underlying a treatment regime and the clinician must scrutinize the estimated treatment regime for scientific validity. To facilitate meaningful information exchange, it is important that estimated treatment regimes be interpretable in a subject-matter context. We propose a simple, yet flexible class of treatment regimes whose members are representable as a short list of if-then statements. Regimes in this class are immediately interpretable and are therefore an appealing choice for broad application in practice. We derive a robust estimator of the optimal regime within this class and demonstrate its finite sample performance using simulation experiments. The proposed method is illustrated with data from two clinical trials.
△ Less
Submitted 28 April, 2015;
originally announced April 2015.
-
$Q$- and $A$-Learning Methods for Estimating Optimal Dynamic Treatment Regimes
Authors:
Phillip J. Schulte,
Anastasios A. Tsiatis,
Eric B. Laber,
Marie Davidian
Abstract:
In clinical practice, physicians make a series of treatment decisions over the course of a patient's disease based on his/her baseline and evolving characteristics. A dynamic treatment regime is a set of sequential decision rules that operationalizes this process. Each rule corresponds to a decision point and dictates the next treatment action based on the accrued information. Using existing data,…
▽ More
In clinical practice, physicians make a series of treatment decisions over the course of a patient's disease based on his/her baseline and evolving characteristics. A dynamic treatment regime is a set of sequential decision rules that operationalizes this process. Each rule corresponds to a decision point and dictates the next treatment action based on the accrued information. Using existing data, a key goal is estimating the optimal regime, that, if followed by the patient population, would yield the most favorable outcome on average. Q- and A-learning are two main approaches for this purpose. We provide a detailed account of these methods, study their performance, and illustrate them using data from a depression study.
△ Less
Submitted 3 February, 2015; v1 submitted 19 February, 2012;
originally announced February 2012.
-
Comment: Demystifying Double Robustness: A Comparison of Alternative Strategies for Estimating a Population Mean from Incomplete Data
Authors:
Anastasios A. Tsiatis,
Marie Davidian
Abstract:
Comment on ``Demystifying Double Robustness: A Comparison of Alternative Strategies for Estimating a Population Mean from Incomplete Data'' [arXiv:0804.2958]
Comment on ``Demystifying Double Robustness: A Comparison of Alternative Strategies for Estimating a Population Mean from Incomplete Data'' [arXiv:0804.2958]
△ Less
Submitted 18 April, 2008;
originally announced April 2008.
