Adjusting overall survival for treatment switches: Commonly used methods and practical application

Pharmaceutical Statistics

Volumn 12, Issue 6, 2013, Pages 348-357

  Watkins, Claire ^a   Huang, Xin ^b   Latimer, Nicholas ^c   Tang, Yiyun ^b   Wright, Elaine J ^d  

^a ASTRAZENECA   (United Kingdom)

^b PFIZER INC   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD   (United Kingdom)

^d F HOFFMANN LA ROCHE LTD   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

crossover; health technology assessment; inverse probability of censoring weighting; rank preserving structural failure time; treatment switching

Indexed keywords

IMATINIB; PAZOPANIB; PLACEBO; SUNITINIB;

ADVANCED CANCER; ADVANCED RENAL CELL CARCINOMA; ARTICLE; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); CONTROLLED STUDY; DISEASE COURSE; DRUG SUBSTITUTION; EXPERIMENTAL THERAPY; GASTROINTESTINAL STROMAL TUMOR; HEALTH; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; KIDNEY CARCINOMA; MEDICAL RESEARCH; ONCOLOGY; OVERALL SURVIVAL; PROCEDURES; STUDY DESIGN; SURVIVAL;

CROSSOVER; HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT; INVERSE PROBABILITY OF CENSORING WEIGHTING; RANK-PRESERVING STRUCTURAL FAILURE TIME; TREATMENT SWITCHING;

CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; DISEASE PROGRESSION; ENDPOINT DETERMINATION; HUMANS; MODELS, STATISTICAL; NEOPLASMS; PROBABILITY; RESEARCH DESIGN; SOFTWARE; SURVIVAL ANALYSIS; TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT, BIOMEDICAL;

EID: 84887453287     PISSN: 15391604     EISSN: 15391612     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/pst.1602     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Robins JM, Tsiatis AA,. Correcting for noncompliance in randomized trials using rank preserving structural failure time models. Communications in Statistics-Theory and Methods 1991; 20: 2609-2631.
2. Robins J,. Information recovery and bias adjustment in proportional hazards regression analysis of randomized trials using surrogate markers. Proceedings of the Biopharmaceutical Section, American Statistical Association, 1993; 24-33.
3. ICH E9 Expert Working Group. Statistical principles for clinical trials: ICH harmonized tripartite guideline. Statistics in Medicine 1999; 18: 1905-1942.
4. Morden J, Lambert P, Latimer N, Abrams K, Wailoo A,. Assessing methods for dealing with treatment switching in randomised controlled trials: a simulation study. BMC Medical Research Methodology 2011; 11 (4): 1-20.
5. Robins JM, Blevins D, Ritter G, Wulfsohn M,. G-estimation of the effect of prophylaxis therapy for Pneumocystis carinii pneumonia on the survival of AIDS patients. Epidemiology 1992; 3: 319-336.
6. Fewell Z, Hernan M, Wolfe F, Tilling K, Choi H, Sterne J,. Controlling for time-dependent confounding using marginal structural models. The Stata Journal 2004; 4 (4): 402-420.
7. Robins JM, Rotnitzky A,. Recovery of information and adjustment for dependent censoring using surrogate markers. In AIDS epidemiology-methodological issues, Jewell N, Dietz K, Farewell V, (eds). Birkhäuser: Boston, MA, 1992; 297-331.
8. Robins JM, Finkelstein D,. Correcting for noncompliance and dependent censoring in an AIDS clinical trial with inverse probability of censoring weighted (IPCW) log-rank tests. Biometrics 2000; 56: 779-788.
9. Robins JM,. Causal inference from complex longitudinal data. In Latent variable modeling and applications to causality, Berkane M, (ed.), Lecture Notes in Statistics (120). Springer-Verlag: New York, 1997; 69-117.
10. White I,. Randomization-based methods for correcting for treatment changes: examples from the Concorde trial. Statistics in Medicine 1999; 18 (19): 2617-2634. (Pubitemid 29465600)
11. White I, Walker S, Babiker A,. strbee: randomization-based efficacy estimator. The Stata Journal 2002; 2 (2): 140-150.
12. Branson M, Whitehead J,. Estimating a treatment effect in survival strudies in which patients switch treatment. Statistics in Medicine 2002; 21: 2449-2463. (Pubitemid 34960010)
13. Robins J, Hernan M, Brumback B,. Marginal structural models and causal inference in epidemiology. Epidemiology 2000; 11 (5): 550-560. (Pubitemid 30660034)
14. Hernan M, Brumback B, Robins J,. Marginal structural models to estimate the causal effect of zidovudine on the survival of HIV-positive men. Epidemiology 2000; 11 (5): 561-570. (Pubitemid 30660035)
15. Yamaguchi T, Ohashi Y,. Adjusting for differential proportions of second-line treatment in cancer clinical trials. Part I: structural nested models and marginal structural models to test and estimate treatment arm effects. Statistics in Medicine 2004; 23 (13): 1991-2003. (Pubitemid 38968024)
16. Latimer NJ, Abrams KR, Lambert PC, Crowther MJ, Wailoo AJ, Morden JP, Akehurst RL, Campbell MJ,. Adjusting survival time estimates to account for treatment switching in randomised controlled trials-a simulation study. University of Sheffield, Health Economics and Decision Sciences Discussion Paper, March 2013. Available at http://www.shef.ac.uk/scharr/sections/heds/ discussion-papers/1306-1.259487 (accessed 4th September 2013).
17. NICE Guide to the methods of technology appraisal, April 2013. Available from http://www.nice.org.uk/media/D45/1E/GuideToMethodsTechnologyAppraisal2013. pdf (accessed 4th September 2013).
18. Robins J, Greenland S,. Adjusting for differential rates of prophylaxis therapy for PCP in high- versus low-dose AZT treatment arms in an AIDS randomized trial. JASA 1994; 89: 737-749.
19. Harvard School of Public Health Program on Causal Inference: Software-marginal structural Cox model in SAS, 2012. Available at: http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/causal/files/2012/10/samplemsmcox.txt (accessed 4th September 2013).
20. D'Agostino RB, Cupples LA, Anderson K, Kannel WB,. Relation of pooled logistic regression to time dependent Cox regression analysis: the Framingham Heart Study. Stat Med 1990; 9 (12): 1501-1515.
21. NICE technology appraisal guidance 179. Sunitinib for the treatment of gastrointestinal stromal tumours, September 2009. Available at: http://guidance.nice.org.uk/TA179 (accessed 4th September 2013).
22. Demetri GD, Garrett CR, Schöffski P, Shah MH, Verweij J, Leyvraz S, Hurwitz HI, Pousa AL, Le Cesne A, Goldstein D, Paz-Ares L, Blay JY, McArthur GA, Xu QC, Huang X, Harmon CS, Tassell V, Cohen DP, Casali PG,. Complete longitudinal analyses of the randomized, placebo-controlled, phase III trial of sunitinib in patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumor following imatinib failure. Clinical Cancer Research 2012; 18 (11): 3170-3179.
23. NICE technology appraisal guidance 215. Pazopanib for the first-line treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma, February 2011. Available at: http://guidance.nice.org.uk/TA215 (accessed 4th September 2013).
24. Sternberg CN, Hawkins RE, Wagstaff J, Salman P, Mardiak J, Barrios CH, Zarba JJ, Gladkov OA, Lee E, Szczylik C, McCann L, Rubin SD, Chen M, Davis ID,. A randomised, double-blind phase III study of pazopanib in patients with advanced and/or metastatic renal cell carcinoma: final overall survival results and safety update. European Journal of Cancer 2013; 49 (6): 1287-1296.
25. Hotta K, Suzuki E, Di Maio M, Chiodini P, Fujiwara Y, Takigawa N, Ichihara E, Reck M, Manegold C, Pilz L, Hisamoto-Sato A, Tabata M, Tanimoto M, Shepherd FA, Kiura K,. Progression-free survival and overall survival in phase III trials of molecular-targeted agents in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. Lung Cancer 2013; 79: 20-26.