Meta-STEPP: subpopulation treatment effect pattern plot for individual patient data meta-analysis

Statistics in Medicine

Volumn 35, Issue 21, 2016, Pages 3704-3716

  Wang, Xin Victoria ^a,b   Cole, Bernard ^c   Bonetti, Marco ^d   Gelber, Richard D ^a,b  

^a DANA FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE   (United States)

^b HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

^c University of Vermont   (United States)

^d BOCCONI UNIVERSITY   (Italy)

Author keywords

clinical trial; meta analysis; survival analysis; treatment covariate interaction

Indexed keywords

ESTROGEN RECEPTOR;

ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; CANCER CHEMOTHERAPY; DATA PROCESSING; HUMAN; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); METHODOLOGY; PATIENT CARE; PATIENT CODING; PROTEIN EXPRESSION; SIMULATION; TREATMENT RESPONSE;

EID: 84980410055     PISSN: 02776715     EISSN: 10970258     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sim.6958     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Paik S, Shak S, Tang G, Kim C, Baker J, Cronin M, Baehner FL, Walker MG, Watson D, Park T, Hiller W, Fisher ER, Wickerham DL, Bryant J, Wolmark N. A multigene assay to predict recurrence of tamoxifen-treated, node-negative breast cancer. New England Journal of Medicine 2004; 351(27): 2817–2826.
2. Paik S, Tang G, Shak S, Kim C, Baker J, Kim W, Cronin M, Baehner FL, Watson D, Bryant J, Costantino JP, Geyer CE Jr, Wickerham DL, Wolmark N. Gene expression and benefit of chemotherapy in women with node-negative, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. Journal of Clinical Oncology 2006; 24(23): 3726–3734.
3. Esteva FJ, Sahin AA, Cristofanilli M, Coombes K, Lee SJ, Baker J, Cronin M, Walker M, Watson D, Shak S, Hortobagyi GN. Prognostic role of a multigene reverse transcriptase-PCR assay in patients with node-negative breast cancer not receiving adjuvant systemic therapy. Clinical Cancer Research 2005; 11(9): 3315–3319.
4. Debray T, Moons KG, Ahmed I, Koffijberg H, Riley RD. A framework for developing, implementing, and evaluating clinical prediction models in an individual participant data meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine 2013; 32(18): 3158–3180.
5. Abo-Zaid G, Sauerbrei W, Riley RD. Individual participant data meta-analysis of prognostic factor studies: state of the art?BMC Medical Research Methodology 2012; 12: 56.
6. Debray TP, Vergouwe Y, Koffijberg H, Nieboer D, Steyerberg EW, Moons KG. A new framework to enhance the interpretation of external validation studies of clinical prediction models. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2015; 68(3): 279–289.
7. Moons KG, Kengne AP, Grobbee DE, Royston P, Vergouwe Y, Altman DG, Woodward M. Risk prediction models: II. External validation, model updating, and impact assessment. Heart 2012; 98: 691–698.
8. Moons KG, Royston P, Vergouwe Y, Grobbee DE, Altman DG. Prognosis and prognostic research: what, why, and how?. BMJ 2009; 338: b375.
9. Steyerberg EW. Clinical Prediction Models. Springer: New York, 2009.
10. Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group. Effect of radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery on 10-year recurrence and 15-year breast cancer death: meta-analysis of individual patient data for 10 801 women in 17 randomised trials. The Lancet 2011; 378(9804): 1707.
11. Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group. Relevance of breast cancer hormone receptors and other factors to the efficacy of adjuvant tamoxifen: patient-level meta-analysis of randomised trials. The Lancet 2011; 378(9793): 771–784.
12. Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group. Comparisons between different polychemotherapy regimens for early breast cancer: meta-analyses of long-term outcome among 100 000 women in 123 randomised trials. The Lancet 2012; 379(9814): 432–444.
13. Lazar AA, Cole BF, Bonetti M, Gelber RD. Evaluation of treatment-effect heterogeneity using biomarkers measured on a continuous scale: subpopulation treatment effect pattern plot. Journal of Clinical Oncology 2010; 28(29): 4539–4544.
14. Bonetti M, Gelber RD. A graphical method to assess treatment-covariate interactions using the Cox model on subsets of the data. Statistics in Medicine 2000; 19(19): 2595–2609.
15. Bonetti M, Gelber R. D. Patterns of treatment effects in subsets of patients in clinical trials. Biostatistics 2004; 5(3): 465–481.
16. Bonetti M, Zahrieh D, Cole BF, Gelber RD. A small sample study of the STEPP approach to assessing treatment-covariate interactions in survival data. Statistics in Medicine 2009; 28(8): 1255–1268.
17. Gray RJ. Flexible methods for analyzing survival data using splines, with applications to breast cancer prognosis. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1992; 87(420): 942–951.
18. Royston P, Sauerbrei W. Multivariable modeling with cubic regression splines: a principled approach. Stata Journal 2007; 7(1): 45–70.
19. Royston P, Sauerbrei W. A new approach to modelling interactions between treatment and continuous covariates in clinical trials by using fractional polynomials. Statistics in Medicine 2004; 23(16): 2509–2525.
20. Wang R, Lagakos SW, Ware JH, Hunter DJ, Drazen JM. Statistics in medicine reporting of subgroup analyses in clinical trials. New England Journal of Medicine 2007; 357(21): 2189–2194.
21. Claggett B, Tian L, Zhao L, Castagno D, Wei LJ. Estimating subject-specific treatment differences for risk-benefit assessment with applications to beta-blocker effectiveness trials. In Topics in Applied Statistics. Springer, 2013; 75–86.
22. Zhao L, Tian L, Cai T, Claggett B, Wei LJ. Effectively selecting a target population for a future comparative study. Journal of the American Statistical Association 2013; 108(502): 527–539.
23. Li J, Zhao L, Tian L, Cai T, Claggett B, Callegaro A, Dizier B, Spiessens B, Ulloa-Montoya F, Wei LJ. A predictive enrichment procedure to identify potential responders to a new therapy for randomized, comparative, controlled clinical studies. Biometrics 2015. DOI: 10.1111/biom.12461.
24. Karlsson P, Cole BF, Chua BH, Price KN, Lindtner J, Collins JP, Kovács A, Thürlimann B, Crivellari D, Castiglione-Gertsch M, Forbes JF, Gelber RD, Goldhirsch A, Gruber G, International Breast Cancer Study Group. Patterns and risk factors for locoregional failures after mastectomy for breast cancer: an International Breast Cancer Study Group report. Annals of Oncology 2012; 23(11): 2852–2858.
25. Regan MM, Neven P, Giobbie-Hurder A, Goldhirsch A, Ejlertsen B, Mauriac L, Forbes JF, Smith I, Láng I, Wardley A, Rabaglio M, Price KN, Gelber RD, Coates AS, Thürlimann B, BIG 1-98 Collaborative Group, International Breast Cancer Study Group (IBCSG). Assessment of letrozole and tamoxifen alone and in sequence for postmenopausal women with steroid hormone receptor-positive breast cancer: the BIG 1-98 randomised clinical trial at 8.1 years median follow-up. The Lancet Oncology 2011; 12(12): 1101–1108.
26. Regan MM, Price KN, Giobbie-Hurder A, Thürlimann B, Gelber RD, et al. Interpreting breast international group (BIG) 1-98: a randomized, double-blind, phase iii trial comparing letrozole and tamoxifen as adjuvant endocrine therapy for postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive, early breast cancer. Breast Cancer Research 2011; 13(3): 209.
27. Regan MM, Gelber RD. Predicting response to systemic treatments: learning from the past to plan for the future. The Breast 2005; 14(6): 582–593.
28. Pogue-Geile K. L, Kim C, Jeong JH, Tanaka N, Bandos H, Gavin PG, Fumagalli D, Goldstein LC, Sneige N, Burandt E, et al. Predicting degree of benefit from adjuvant trastuzumab in NSABP Trial B-31. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 2013; 105(23): 1782–1788.
29. Viale G, Regan MM, Dell'Orto P, Mastropasqua MG, Maiorano E, Rasmussen BB, MacGrogan G, Forbes JF, Paridaens RJ, Colleoni M, et al. Which patients benefit most from adjuvant aromatase inhibitors? Results using a composite measure of prognostic risk in the BIG 1-98 randomized trial. Annals of Oncology 2011; 22(10): 2201–2207.
30. Sauerbrei W, Royston P. A new strategy for meta-analysis of continuous covariates in observational studies. Statistics in Medicine 2011; 30(28): 3341–3360.
31. Thompson SG. Controversies in meta-analysis: the case of the trials of serum cholesterol reduction. Statistical Methods in Medical Research 1993; 2(2): 173–192.
32. Yusuf S, Peto R, Lewis J, Collins R, Sleight P. Beta blockade during and after myocardial infarction: an overview of the randomized trials. Progress in Cardiovascular Diseases 1985; 27(5): 335–371.
33. Cox D. R. Regression models and life-tables. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Methodological) 1972: 187–220.
34. Berry G, Kitchin RM, Mock PA. A comparison of two simple hazard ratio estimators based on the logrank test. Statistics in Medicine 1991; 10(5): 749–755.
35. Smith CT, Williamson PR. A comparison of methods for fixed effects meta-analysis of individual patient data with time to event outcomes. Clinical Trials 2007; 4(6): 621–630.
36. Whitehead A, Whitehead J. A general parametric approach to the meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. Statistics in Medicine 1991; 10(11): 1665–1677.
37. DerSimonian R, Kacker R. Random-effects model for meta-analysis of clinical trials: an update. Contemporary Clinical Trials 2007; 28(2): 105–114.
38. Royston P, Sauerbrei W. Interaction of treatment with a continuous variable: simulation study of power for several methods of analysis. Statistics in Medicine 2014; 33(27): 4695–4708.
39. Royston P, Sauerbrei W. Interaction of treatment with a continuous variable: simulation study of significance level for several methods of analysis. Statistics in Medicine 2013; 32(22): 3788–3803.
40. DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Controlled Clinical Trials 1986; 7(3): 177–188.
41. Sobel ME, Madigan DB, Wang W. Meta-analysis: a causal framework, with application to randomized studies of Vioxx. http://weiwang.io/research/meta.pdf, Psychometrika. In press.