Comparing and combining biomarkers as principle surrogates for time-to-event clinical endpoints

被引:17
|
作者
Gabriel, Erin E. [1 ]
Sachs, Michael C. [2 ]
Gilbert, Peter B. [1 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Fred Hutchinson Canc Res Ctr, Vaccine & Infect Dis Div, Seattle, WA 98109 USA
[2] NCI, Biometr Res Branch, Washington, DC USA
[3] Univ Washington, Dept Biostat, Seattle, WA 98195 USA
关键词
causal inference; surrogate endpoint evaluation; survival analysis; accuracy measures; multivariate principal stratification; MARKERS;
D O I
10.1002/sim.6349
中图分类号
Q [生物科学];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
Principal surrogate endpoints are useful as targets for phase I and II trials. In many recent trials, multiple post-randomization biomarkers are measured. However, few statistical methods exist for comparison of or combination of biomarkers as principal surrogates, and none of these methods to our knowledge utilize time-to-event clinical endpoint information. We propose a Weibull model extension of the semi-parametric estimated maximum likelihood method that allows for the inclusion of multiple biomarkers in the same risk model as multivariate candidate principal surrogates. We propose several methods for comparing candidate principal surrogates and evaluating multivariate principal surrogates. These include the time-dependent and surrogate-dependent true and false positive fraction, the time-dependent and the integrated standardized total gain, and the cumulative distribution function of the risk difference. We illustrate the operating characteristics of our proposed methods in simulations and outline how these statistics can be used to evaluate and compare candidate principal surrogates. We use these methods to investigate candidate surrogates in the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial. Copyright (c) 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
引用
收藏
页码:381 / 395
页数:15
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Comparing and combining biomarkers as principal surrogates for time-to-event clinical endpoints (vol 34, pg 381, 2015)
    Gabriel, Erin E.
    Sachs, Michael C.
    Gilbert, Peter B.
    [J]. STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2017, 36 (21) : 3440 - 3440
  • [2] Adjusted estimates for time-to-event endpoints
    Storer, Barry E.
    Gooley, Ted A.
    Jones, Michael P.
    [J]. LIFETIME DATA ANALYSIS, 2008, 14 (04) : 484 - 495
  • [3] Adjusted estimates for time-to-event endpoints
    Barry E. Storer
    Ted A. Gooley
    Michael P. Jones
    [J]. Lifetime Data Analysis, 2008, 14 : 484 - 495
  • [4] Comparing the power of the discontinuation design to that of the classic randomized design on time-to-event endpoints
    Capra, WB
    [J]. CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIALS, 2004, 25 (02): : 168 - 177
  • [5] Heterogeneous treatment effects in stratified clinical trials with time-to-event endpoints
    Beisel, Christina
    Benner, Axel
    Kunz, Christina
    Kopp-Schneider, Annette
    [J]. BIOMETRICAL JOURNAL, 2017, 59 (03) : 511 - 530
  • [6] A multistate platform model for time-to-event endpoints in oncology clinical trials
    Lin, Chih-Wei
    Nagase, Mario
    Doshi, Sameer
    Dutta, Sandeep
    [J]. CPT-PHARMACOMETRICS & SYSTEMS PHARMACOLOGY, 2024, 13 (01): : 154 - 167
  • [7] Sample sizes for clinical trials with time-to-event endpoints and competing risks
    Schulgen, G
    Olschewski, M
    Krane, V
    Wanner, C
    Ruf, G
    Schumacher, M
    [J]. CONTEMPORARY CLINICAL TRIALS, 2005, 26 (03) : 386 - 396
  • [8] Meta-analysis of clinical trials with competing time-to-event endpoints
    Meddis, Alessandra
    Latouche, Aurelien
    Zhou, Bingqing
    Michiels, Stefan
    Fine, Jason
    [J]. BIOMETRICAL JOURNAL, 2020, 62 (03) : 712 - 723
  • [9] Time-to-Event Endpoints in Imaging Biomarker Studies
    Chen, Ruizhe
    Wang, Hao
    [J]. JOURNAL OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING, 2024,
  • [10] LEVERAGING REAL-WORLD DATA FOR TIME-TO-EVENT ENDPOINTS IN CLINICAL TRIALS
    Parashar, D.
    Almgren, P.
    Berglund, A.
    Guasconi, A.
    Smith, C.
    Torlinska, B.
    Wang, J.
    Wang, Q.
    [J]. VALUE IN HEALTH, 2022, 25 (01) : S256 - S256