Selecting Optimal Subgroups for Treatment Using Many Covariates

Epidemiology

Volumn 30, Issue 3, 2019, Pages 334-341

  Vanderweele, Tyler J ^a   Luedtke, Alex R ^b   Van Der Laan, Mark J ^c   Kessler, Ronald C ^d  

^a HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

^b Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^d HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

Author keywords

Effect modification; Interaction; Optimal treatment selection; Personalized treatment; Precision medicine; Randomized trial; Subgroup

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COST; HEALTH CARE PRACTICE; HEURISTICS; MATHEMATICAL COMPUTING; OBSERVATIONAL STUDY; PERSONALIZED MEDICINE; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGNOSTIC ASSESSMENT; TREATMENT PLANNING; HUMAN; PATIENT SELECTION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC);

HUMANS; OBSERVATIONAL STUDIES AS TOPIC; PATIENT SELECTION; PRECISION MEDICINE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC;

EID: 85064722203     PISSN: 10443983     EISSN: 15315487     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/EDE.0000000000000991     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Yusuf S Wittes J Probstfield J Tyroler HA. Analysis and interpretation of treatment effects in subgroups of patients in randomized clinical trials. JAMA. 1991; 266: 93-98.
2. Assmann SF Pocock SJ Enos LE Kasten LE. Subgroup analysis and other (mis)uses of baseline data in clinical trials. Lancet. 2000; 355: 1064-1069.
3. Pocock SJ Assmann SE Enos LE Kasten LE. Subgroup analysis, covariate adjustment and baseline comparisons in clinical trial reporting: current practice and problems. Stat Med. 2002; 21: 2917-2930.
4. Rothwell PM. Can overall results of clinical trials be applied to all patients? Lancet. 1995; 345: 1616-1619.
5. Lagakos SW. The challenge of subgroup analyses-reporting without distorting. N Engl J Med. 2006; 354: 1667-1669.
6. Wang R Lagakos SW Ware JH Hunter DJ Drazen JM. Statistics in medicine-reporting of subgroup analyses in clinical trials. N Engl J Med. 2007; 357: 2189-2194.
7. Rothman KJ Greenland S Walker AM. Concepts of interaction. Am J Epidemiol. 1980; 112: 467-470.
8. Rothman KJ. Modern Epidemiology. 1986. Little Brown & Co.
9. Hosmer DW Lemeshow S. Confidence interval estimation of interaction. Epidemiology. 1992; 3: 452-456.
10. Li R Chambless L. Test for additive interaction in proportional hazards models. Ann Epidemiol. 2007; 17: 227-236.
11. VanderWeele TJ Knol MJ. A tutorial on interaction. Epidemiologic Methods. 2014; 3: 33-72.
12. Murphy SA. Optimal dynamic treatment regimes. J R Stat Soc Series B. 2003; 65: 331-336.
13. Robins JM. Lin DY Heagerty H. Optimal structural nested models for optimal sequential decisions. In: Proceedings of the Second Seattle Symposium in Biostatistics. 2004; 179: 189-326).
14. Chakraborty B Moodie EE. Statistical Methods for Dynamic Treatment Regimes. 2013. Berlin, Heidelberg, New York: Springer.
15. Hayward RA Kent DM Vijan S Hofer TP. Multivariable risk prediction can greatly enhance the statistical power of clinical trial subgroup analysis. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2006; 6: 18.
16. Kent DM Hayward RA. Limitations of applying summary results of clinical trials to individual patients: the need for risk stratification. JAMA. 2007; 298: 1209-1212.
17. Pocock SJ Lubsen J. More on subgroup analyses in clinical trials. N Engl J Med. 2008; 358: 2076; author reply 2076-2077.
18. Abadie A Chingos MM West MR. Endogenous Stratification in Randomized Experiments. Review of Economics and Statistics. 2018; 100: 567-580.
19. Kent DM Hayward RA Griffith JL. An independently derived and validated predictive model for selecting patients with myocardial infarction who are likely to benefit from tissue plasminogen activator compared with streptokinase. Am J Med. 2002; 113: 104-111.
20. Fox KA Poole-Wilson P Clayton TC. 5-year outcome of an interventional strategy in non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome: the British Heart Foundation RITA 3 randomised trial. Lancet. 2005; 366: 914-920.
21. Rothwell PM. Subgroup analysis in randomised controlled trials: importance, indications, and interpretation. Lancet 2005; 365: 176-186.
22. Pane JF Griffin BA McCaffrey DF Karam R. Effectiveness of cognitive tutor algebra I at scale. Educ Eval Policy Anal. 2014; 36: 127-144.
23. Peck LR. Subgroup analysis in social experiments: measuring program impacts based on post-treatment choice. Am J Eval. 2003; 24: 157-187.
24. Hansen BB. The prognostic analogue of the propensity score. Biometrika 2008; 95: 481-488.
25. Cai T Tian L Wong PH Wei LJ. Analysis of randomized comparative clinical trial data for personalized treatment selections. Biostatistics. 2011; 12: 270-282.
26. Zhao L Tian L Cai T Claggett B Wei LJ. Effectively selecting a target population for a future comparative study. J Am Stat Assoc. 2013; 108: 527-539.
27. Luedtke AR van der Laan MJ. Targeted learning of the mean outcome under an optimal dynamic treatment rule. J Causal Inference. 2015; 3: 61-95.
28. Luedtke AR van der Laan MJ. Statistical inference for the mean outcome under a possibly non-unique optimal treatment strategy. Ann Stat. 2016; 44: 713-742.
29. Luedtke AR van der Laan MJ. Optimal dynamic treatments in resource-limited settings. Int J Biostat. 2016; 12: 283-303.
30. Rubin D. Estimating causal effects of treatments in randomized and non-randomized studies. J. Edu Psychol. 1974; 66: 688-701.
31. van der Laan MJ Polley EC Hubbard AE. Super learner. Stat Appl Genet Mol Biol. 2007; 6: Article25.
32. Gail M Simon R. Testing for qualitative interactions between treatment effects and patient subsets. Biometrics. 1985; 41: 361-372.
33. Piantadosi S Gail MH. A comparison of the power of two tests for qualitative interactions. Stat Med. 1993; 12: 1239-1248.
34. Pan G Wolfe DA. Test for qualitative interaction of clinical significance. Stat Med. 1997; 16: 1645-1652.
35. Silvapulle MJ. Tests against qualitative interaction: exact critical values and robust tests. Biometrics. 2001; 57: 1157-1165.
36. Li J Chan IS. Detecting qualitative interactions in clinical trials: an extension of range test. J Biopharm Stat. 2006; 16: 831-841.
37. Moore JH Gilbert JC Tsai CT. A flexible computational framework for detecting, characterizing, and interpreting statistical patterns of epistasis in genetic studies of human disease susceptibility. J Theor Biol. 2006; 241: 252-261.
38. Green DP Kern HL. Modeling heterogeneous treatment effects in survey experiments with Bayesian additive regression trees. Public Opin Q. 2012: 76: 491-511.
39. Imai K Ratkovic M. Estimating treatment effect heterogeneity in randomized program evaluation. Ann Appl Stat. 2013; 7: 443-470.
40. Berger JO Wang X Shen L. A Bayesian approach to subgroup identification. J Biopharm Stat. 2015; 24: 110-129.
41. VanderWeele TJ Robins JM. The identification of synergism in the sufficient-component-cause framework. Epidemiology. 2007; 18: 329-339.
42. VanderWeele TJ. On the distinction between interaction and effect modification. Epidemiology. 2009; 20: 863-871.
43. VanderWeele TJ. Explanation in Causal Inference: Methods for Mediation and Interaction. 2015. New York: Oxford University Press.
44. VanderWeele TJ Knol MJ. Interpretation of subgroup analyses in randomized trials: heterogeneity versus secondary interventions. Ann Intern Med. 2011; 154: 680-683.
45. van der Laan MJ Luedtke AR. Targeted learning of the mean outcome under an optimal dynamic treatment rule. J Causal Inference. 2014; 3: 61-95.