Subgroup analysis of treatment effects for misclassified biomarkers with time-to-event data

被引:2
|
作者
Wan, Fang [1 ]
Titman, Andrew C. [1 ]
Jaki, Thomas F. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Lancaster, Lancaster, England
基金
英国医学研究理事会;
关键词
Misclassification; Simultaneous confidence intervals; Subgroup; Survival; COX REGRESSION; CANCER; ENRICHMENT; SURVIVAL; TRIALS; DESIGN; MODEL;
D O I
10.1111/rssc.12364
中图分类号
O21 [概率论与数理统计]; C8 [统计学];
学科分类号
020208 ; 070103 ; 0714 ;
摘要
Analysing subgroups defined by biomarkers is of increasing importance in clinical research. In many situations the biomarker is subject to misclassification error, meaning that the subgroups are identified with imperfect sensitivity and specificity. In these cases, it is improper to assume the Cox proportional hazards model for the subgroup-specific treatment effects for time-to-event data with respect to the true subgroups, since the survival distributions with respect to the diagnosed subgroups will not adhere to the proportional hazards assumption. This precludes the possibility of using simple adjustment procedures. Two approaches to modelling are considered; the corrected score approach and a method based on formally modelling the data as a mixture of Cox models using an expectation-maximization algorithm for estimation. The methods are comparable for moderate-to-large sample sizes, but the expectation-maximization algorithm performs better when there are 100 patients per group. An estimate of the overall population treatment effect is obtained through the interpretation of the hazard ratio as a concordance odds. The methods are illustrated on data from a renal cell cancer trial.
引用
收藏
页码:1447 / 1463
页数:17
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Bayesian credible subgroup identification for treatment effectiveness in time-to-event data
    Duy Ngo
    Baumgartner, Richard
    Mt-Isa, Shahrul
    Feng, Dai
    Chen, Jie
    Schnell, Patrick
    [J]. PLOS ONE, 2020, 15 (02):
  • [2] Subgroup Analysis with Time-to-Event Data Under a Logistic-Cox Mixture Model
    Wu, Ruo-fan
    Zheng, Ming
    Yu, Wen
    [J]. SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF STATISTICS, 2016, 43 (03) : 863 - 878
  • [3] Consequences of Delayed Treatment Effects on Analysis of Time-to-Event Endpoints
    Gil D. Fine
    [J]. Drug information journal : DIJ / Drug Information Association, 2007, 41 : 535 - 539
  • [4] Consequences of delayed treatment effects on analysis of time-to-event endpoints
    Fine, Gil D.
    [J]. DRUG INFORMATION JOURNAL, 2007, 41 (04): : 535 - 539
  • [5] Analysis of time-to-event data with incomplete event adjudication
    Cook, TD
    Kosorok, MR
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN STATISTICAL ASSOCIATION, 2004, 99 (468) : 1140 - 1152
  • [6] SurvITE: Learning Heterogeneous Treatment Effects from Time-to-Event Data
    Curth, Alicia
    Lee, Changhee
    van der Schaar, Mihaela
    [J]. ADVANCES IN NEURAL INFORMATION PROCESSING SYSTEMS 34 (NEURIPS 2021), 2021,
  • [7] Survival analysis—time-to-event data and censoring
    Tanujit Dey
    Stuart R. Lipsitz
    Zara Cooper
    Quoc-Dien Trinh
    Martin Krzywinski
    Naomi Altman
    [J]. Nature Methods, 2022, 19 : 906 - 908
  • [8] Time-To-Event Data: An Overview and Analysis Considerations
    Le-Rademacher, Jennifer
    Wang, Xiaofei
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THORACIC ONCOLOGY, 2021, 16 (07) : 1067 - 1074
  • [9] Germination Data Analysis by Time-to-Event Approaches
    Romano, Alessandro
    Stevanato, Piergiorgio
    [J]. PLANTS-BASEL, 2020, 9 (05):
  • [10] Time-to-Event Analysis
    Tolles, Juliana
    Lewis, Roger J.
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2016, 315 (10): : 1046 - 1047