On the relationship between the causal-inference and meta-analytic paradigms for the validation of surrogate endpoints

Biometrics

Volumn 71, Issue 1, 2015, Pages 15-24

  Alonso, Ariel ^a   Van der Elst, Wim ^b   Molenberghs, Geert ^b,c   Buyse, Marc ^b,d   Burzykowski, Tomasz ^b,d  

^a MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^b HASSELT UNIVERSITY   (Belgium)

^c KU LEUVEN   (Belgium)

^d INTERNATIONAL DRUG DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE   (Belgium)

Author keywords

Causal inference; Meta analytic approach; Surrogate endpoints

Indexed keywords

ANALYTIC APPROACH; CAUSAL INFERENCES; CLINICAL STUDY; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS; DRUG DEVELOPMENT; INCREASING COSTS; META-ANALYSIS; META-ANALYTIC APPROACH; SURROGATE ENDPOINT;

BIOMETRICS;

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK; HEURISTICS; MEDICINE; META-ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; THEORETICAL STUDY;

BIOLOGICAL MARKER;

BIOMETRY; COMPUTER PROGRAM; COMPUTER SIMULATION; EPIDEMIOLOGY; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PROCEDURES; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL MODEL; VALIDATION STUDY;

BIOMARKERS; BIOMETRY; CAUSALITY; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; EFFECT MODIFIER, EPIDEMIOLOGIC; EPIDEMIOLOGIC METHODS; META-ANALYSIS AS TOPIC; MODELS, STATISTICAL; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); SOFTWARE;

EID: 84961345179     PISSN: 0006341X     EISSN: 15410420     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/biom.12245     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Burzykowski, T., Molenberghs, G., and Buyse, M. (2005). The Evaluation of Surrogate Endpoints. New York: Springer-Verlag.
2. Buyse, M. and Molenberghs, G. (1998) The validation of surrogate endpoints in randomized experiments. Biometrics 54, 1014-1029.
3. Buyse, M., Molenberghs, G., Burzykowski, T., Renard, D., and Geys, H. (2000). The validation of surrogate endpoints in meta-analyses of randomized experiments. Biostatistics 1, 49-67.
4. Conlon, A. S. C., Taylor, J. M. G., and Elliott, M. R. (2013). Surrogacy assessment using principal stratification when surrogate and outcome measures are multivariate normal. Biostatistics 14, 1-18.
5. Cortiñas Abrahantes, J., Molenberghs, G., Burzykowski, T., Shkedy, Z., and Renard, D. (2004). Choice of units of analysis and modeling strategies in multilevel hierarchical models. Computational Statistics and Data Analysis, 47, 537-563.
6. Daniels, M.J. and Hughes, M.D. (1997). Meta-analysis for the evaluation of potential surrogate markers. Statistics in Medicine 16, 1515-1527.
7. Daniels, M.J., Roy, J.A., Kim, C., Hogan, J.W., and Perri, M.G. (2012). Bayesian inference for the causal effect of mediation. Biometrics, 68, 1028-1036.
8. Frangakis, C.E. and Rubin, D.B. (2002). Principal stratification in causal inference. Biometrics 58, 21-29.
9. Gail, M.H., Pfeiffer, R., van Houwelingen, H.C., and Carroll, R.J. (2000). On meta-analytic assessment of surrogate outcomes. Biostatistics 1, 231-246.
10. Gilbert, P.B. and Hudgens, M.G. (2008). Evaluating candidate principal surrogate endpoints. Biometrics 64, 1146-1154.
11. Holland, P.W. (1986). Statistics and causal inference. Journal of the American Statistical Association 81, 945-960.
12. Joffe, M.M. and Greene, T. (2009). Related causal frameworks for surrogate outcomes. Biometrics 65, 530-538.
13. Li, Y., Taylor, J.M.G., and Elliott M.R. (2010). A Bayesian approach to surrogacy assessment using principal stratification in clinical trials. Biometrics 58, 21-29.
14. Li, Y., Taylor, J.M.G., Elliott, M.R., and Sargent, D.R. (2011). Causal assessment of surrogacy in a meta-analysis of colorectal clinical trials. Biostatistics 12, 478-92.
15. Pharmacological Therapy for Macular Degeneration Study Group (1997). Interferon α-IIA is ineffective for patients with choroidal neovascularization secondary to age-related macular degeneration. Results of a prospective randomized placebo-controlled clinical trial. Archives of Ophthalmology 115, 865-872.
16. Prentice, R.L. (1989). Surrogate endpoints in clinical trials: Definitions and operational criteria. Statistics in Medicine 8, 431-440.
17. Taylor, J.M.G., Wang, Y., and Thiébaut, R. (2005). Counterfactual links to the proportion of treatment effect explained by a surrogate marker. Biometrics 61, 1102-1111.
18. Tibaldi, F.S., Cortiñas Abrahantes, J., Molenberghs, G., Renard, D., Burzykowski, T., Buyse, M., Parmar, M., Stijnen, T., and Wolfinger, R. (2003). Simplified hierarchical linear models for the evaluation of surrogate endpoints. Journal of Statistical Computation and Simulation 73, 643-658.
19. Vander Weele, T. (2013). Surrogate measures and consistent surrogates. Biometrics 69, 561-565.