Analysing Survival Endpoints in Randomized Clinical Trials using Generalized Pairwise Comparisons
|
|
- Wilfrid Richardson
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Analysing Survival Endpoints in Randomized Clinical Trials using Generalized Pairwise Comparisons Dr Julien PERON October 2016 Department of Biostatistics HCL LBBE UCBL Department of Medical oncology HCL LBBE UCBL
2 Outline The standard procedure of generalized pairwise comparisons An extension for right-censored data A patient-oriented measure of treatment benefit Benefit-risk balance NCIC PA.3 trial => erlotinib in pancreatic cancer 2
3 Outline The standard procedure of generalized pairwise comparisons NCIC PA.3 trial => erlotinib in pancreatic cancer 3
4 Methods Pairwise comparisons R Treatment (T ) Let x i be the outcome of i th subject in T (i = 1.. n ) Control (C ) Let y j be the outcome of j th subject in C (j = 1.. m ) X i pairwise comparison Y j favors T (favorable) favors C (unfavorable) Neutral or Uninformative Buyse M. stat in med
5 Methods Definition of thresholds Coutinuous outcome Pair x i y j > x i y j < ( ) x i y j x i or y j missing Rating Favorable Unfavorable Neutral Uninformative Buyse. stat in med
6 Methods Definition of priority First priority outcome Second priority outcome Pair rating Favorable NA Favorable Unfavorable NA Unfavorable Neutral/Uninf Favorable Favorable Neutral/Uninf Unfavorable Unfavorable Neutral/Uninf Neutral/Uninf Neutral/Uninf Buyse. stat in med
7 Methods Definition of priority First priority outcome Second priority outcome Pair rating Favorable NA Favorable Unfavorable NA Unfavorable Neutral/Uninf Favorable Favorable Neutral/Uninf Unfavorable Unfavorable Neutral/Uninf Neutral/Uninf Neutral/Uninf Buyse. stat in med
8 Methods Definition of priority First priority outcome Second priority outcome Pair rating Favorable NA Favorable Unfavorable NA Unfavorable Neutral/Uninf Favorable Favorable Neutral/Uninf Unfavorable Unfavorable Neutral/Uninf Neutral/Uninf Neutral/Uninf Buyse. stat in med
9 Methods Standard procedure for pairwise scoring U ij 1when the pair 1when the pair 0 otherwise X i,y j, X i Y j is favorable is unfavorable U 1 m n n m i 1 j 1 U ij Δ in named «net chance of a better outcome» Buyse. stat in med
10 Some notations x i 0 and y j 0 : time-to-event x i and y j : time-to-observation Event indicator : Survival function: δ i = 1 if x i = x i 0 0 if x i < x i 0 ε j = 1 if y j = y j 0 0 if y j < y j 0 in group T in group C S Ttt t = P x i 0 t and S Ctrl t = P y j 0 t 10
11 The standard procedure to include time-toevent outcome (δ i, ε j ) x i y j τ x i y j τ x i y j < τ (1, 1) Favorable Unfavorable Neutral (0, 1) Favorable Uninformative Uninformative (1, 0) Uninformative Unfavorable Uninformative (0, 0) Uninformative Uninformative Uninformative Buyse M. Stat in med,
12 Survival Probability The standard procedure to include time-to-event outcome 1,0 Patient i : censoring 0,5 Treatment group Control group Patient j : event 0,0 Time Gehan. Biometrika,
13 Outline An extension for right-censored data NCIC PA.3 trial => erlotinib in pancreatic cancer 13
14 Survival Probability The extended procedure taking into account non-informative pairs Based on the Kaplan-Meier estimate of the survival function p ( x i 0 > y j 0 ) x i 0 > x i = S Ttt y j = 0,5 S Ttt (x i ) 0,8 1,0 0,8 Patient i : censoring 0,5 Treatment group Control group Patient j : event 0,0 Time Péron J et al, SMMR 2016
15 Survival Probability The extended procedure taking into account non-informative pairs When the estimation of the survival function is discontinue : p ( x i 0 > y j 0 ) x i 0 > x i, y j 0 > y j = t>y j S Ttt t S Ttt x i S Ctrl y j S Ctrl t + S Ctrl t 1,0 Patient i : censoring 0,5 Treatment group Control group Patient j : censoring 0,0 Time Efron, Berkeley Symp,
16 The extended procedure taking into account non-informative pairs For pairs that can not be decidely classified because of censoring, we compute: P x i 0 > y j 0 + τ, et P y j 0 > x i 0 + τ, et P x i 0 y j 0 < τ The pairwise score is: s ij = P x i 0 > y j 0 + τ P y j 0 > x i 0 + τ The net chance of a better outcome is then: = 1 m n n m i=1 j=1 The pairwise weight the analysis of an outcome of lower priority is: ω ij = P x i 0 y j 0 < τ s ij 16
17 Simulation study - Design Objective: To compare the standard and the extended procedures of generalized pairwise comparison Simulation of M = 1000 datasets of with N = 200 patients One time-to-event outcome Threshold τ = 0 months
18 Simulation study - Design Survival time: exponential distributions Scenario 1 : Proportional hazards Scenario 2 : Late treatment effect Scenario 3 : early treatment effect HR HR HR 18
19 Simulation study - Design Several treatment effect sizes Hazard ratio 0,5; 0,7; 1 Administrative censoring proportion Uniform distribution Between 0% and 70% 19
20 Simulation study - Design For each simulated dataset Estimation of the net chance of a better outcome (standard and extended procedure) Test of the null hypothesis (Permutation test, Log-Rank test) Endpoints Bias Power Type 1 error 20
21 Scenario 1 Proportionnal hazards HR = 0,5 HR = 0,7 Péron, et al. SMMR
22 Scenario 1 Proportionnal hazards HR = 0,5 HR = 0,7 Péron, et al. SMMR
23 Survival Probability 1,0 An explanation for this bias? Treatment group Control group Censoring y j Event x i 0,0 Time Standard procedure: Uninformative p ij = 0 Extended procedure: P x i 0 >yj 0 +τ = 1 S C x i τ S C (y j ) P y j 0 >x i 0 +τ = S C x i +τ S C (y j ) Uninformative also p ij = 0 23
24 A correction for this bias f m : Proportion of informative pairs for the trial m(m = 1,, M) corr m = m f m : corrected net chance of a better outcome HR=0,5 Mean bias Censoring rate Bias = E Péron, et al. SMMR
25 Scenario 1 Proportional hazards HR = 0,5 HR = 0,7 Censoring rate Péron, et al. SMMR
26 Power Scenario 2 et 3 Non Proportional hazards Early treatment effect Late treatment effect Censoring rate Censoring rate Type 1 error rate 5% Péron, et al. SMMR
27 Conclusions of the simulation study Bias in the estimation of Δ Less important Correction available when only one endpoint Power of the permutation test extended procedure > standard procedure Exponential distribution Proportional hazards and administrative censoring < 67% (B Efron, Stanford Univ, 1967) Late treatment effect 27
28 Outline A patient-oriented measure of treatment benefit NCIC PA.3 trial => erlotinib in pancreatic cancer 28
29 The net chance of a better outcome Probability for a random patient in the Treatment group to have a better outcome than a random patient in the Control group Treatement group Control group Δ = P X > Y ) Buyse M. Stat in med,
30 The net chance of a better outcome minus the opposite probability. Treatement group Control group Δ = P X > Y P(Y > X) Buyse M. Stat in med,
31 The net chance of a better outcome Treatement group P(Y = X) Control group Buyse M. Stat in med,
32 Survival probability Net chance of a longer survival The net chance of a longer survival Proportional hazards Treatment group Control group Time (months) Péron et al, JAMA oncology,
33 Survival probability Net chance of a longer survival Survival probability Net chance of a longer survival The net chance of a longer survival Treatment group Control group Proportional Hazards Time (months) Treatment group Control group Delayed treatment effect Time (months) Péron et al, JAMA oncology,
34 Survival probability Net chance of a longer survival Survival probability Net chance of a longer survival The net chance of a longer survival Treatment group Control group Proportional Hazards Time (months) Treatment group Control group Opposite hazards Time (months) Péron et al, JAMA oncology,
35 Simulation study - Design Objective: To assess the power of tests based on generalized pairwise comparisons for delayed treatment effect Simulation of M = 1000 datasets of with N = 200 patients One time-to-event outcome
36 Scenario 1 : Proportional hazards Simulation study - Design Scenario 2 : Late treatment effect Survival Survival Time (months) Time (months) 36
37 Simulation study - Design Administrative censoring proportion Uniform distribution Between 0% and 40% For each simulated dataset Estimation of the net chance of a better outcome (extended procedure) with threshold τ 0 to 20 months Test of the null hypothesis (Permutation test, Log-Rank test) 37
38 Delayed treatment effect - POWER 38
39 Proportional Hazards - POWER 39
40 Conclusions When a long-term survival benefit is expected (anticancer immune therapy) The net chance of a longer survival is: Arguably more relevant than traditional methods More powerful than traditional method 40
41 Outline Benefit-risk balance NCIC PA.3 trial => erlotinib in pancreatic cancer 41
42 The benefit-risk balance in the PA.3 trial 569 advanced pancreatic cancer R Gemcitabine + erlotinib Gemcitabine + placebo Moore et al. JCO
43 The benefit-risk balance in the PA.3 trial 43
44 The benefit-risk balance in the PA.3 trial Worst grade related AE Erlotinib group (n=282) Placebo group (n=280) Grade 1 48 (17%) 69 (24.6%) Grade (41.8%) 89 (31.8%) Grade 3 72 (25.5%) 47 (16.8%) Grade 4 11 (3.9%) 6 (2.1%) Grade 5 4 (1.4%) 3 (1.1%) 44
45 The benefit-risk balance in the PA.3 trial Worst grade related AE Erlotinib group (n=282) Placebo group (n=280) Grade 1 48 (17%) 69 (24.6%) Grade (41.8%) 89 (31.8%) 29,4% 18,9% Grade 3 72 (25.5%) 47 (16.8%) Grade 4 11 (3.9%) 6 (2.1%) Grade 5 4 (1.4%) 3 (1.1%) 45
46 Benefit-risk balance Extended procedure Priority Erlotinib > Placebo Placebo > Erlotinib [erlotinib] 1 : OS (Threshold = 2 months) 40.3 % 34.5 % 5.8 % 2 : Worst related AE grade 6.8 % 12.4 % -5.6 % Global 47.1 % 46.9 % 0.2 % (P=.96) Péron J. Roy P. Ding K. Parulekar WR. Roche L and Buyse M. BJC
47 Benefit-risk balance Péron J. Roy P. Ding K. Parulekar WR. Roche L and Buyse M. BJC
48 Software implementation A package R corresponding to the standard procedure and to the extended procedure Available on CRAN ( BuyseTest ) Available on github ( ) 48
49 Conclusions The net chance of a better outcome Is flexible Is meaningful Allows multicriteria analysis Can focus on long-term survival differences Is OK when hazards are not proportionals Is available 49
50 Thank you 50
51 Scénario 1 Mean squared error HR=0,5 Mean squared error Mean squared error = E 2 51
52 Methods Pairwise comparisons R Treatment (T ) Let x i be the outcome of i th subject in T (i = 1.. n ) Control (C ) Let y j be the outcome of j th subject in C (j = 1.. m ) X i pairwise comparison Y j favors T (favorable) favors C (unfavorable) Neutral or Uninformative 52 Buyse M. stat in med 2010
53 Methods Definition of thresholds Coutinuous outcome Pair x i y j > x i y j < ( ) x i y j x i or y j missing Rating Favorable Unfavorable Neutral Uninformative Buyse. stat in med
54 Methods Definition of thresholds Coutinuous outcome Pair x i y j > x i y j < ( ) x i y j x i or y j missing Rating Favorable Unfavorable Neutral Uninformative Buyse. stat in med
55 Methods Definition of priority First priority outcome Second priority outcome Pair rating Favorable NA Favorable Unfavorable NA Unfavorable Uninformative Favorable Favorable Uninformative Unfavorable Unfavorable Uninformative Uninformative Uninformative Buyse. stat in med
56 Methods Definition of priority First priority outcome Second priority outcome Pair rating Favorable NA Favorable Unfavorable NA Unfavorable Uninformative Favorable Favorable Uninformative Unfavorable Unfavorable Uninformative Uninformative Uninformative Buyse. stat in med
57 Methods Definition of priority First priority outcome Second priority outcome Pair rating Favorable NA Favorable Unfavorable NA Unfavorable Uninformative Favorable Favorable Uninformative Unfavorable Unfavorable Uninformative Uninformative Uninformative Buyse. stat in med
58 Méthodes Standard procedure for pairwise scoring 1when the pair U ij 1when the pair 0 otherwise X i,y j, X i Y j is favorable is unfavorable U 1 m n n m i 1 j 1 U ij Δ in named «chance of a better outcome» Buyse. stat in med
59 Survival Probability The extended procedure taking into account non-informative pairs Based on the Kaplan-Meier estimate of the survival function 1,0 0,8 p ( x i 0 > y j 0 ) x i 0 > x i = Patient i : censoring t>y j t y j ε j =1 S T t ds C t S T x i S C y j 0,5 Treatment group Control group Patient j : censoring 0,0 Time Péron J et al, SMMR 2016
60 Survival Probability The extended procedure taking into account non-informative pairs When the estimation of the survival function is discontinue : p ( x i 0 > y j 0 ) x i 0 > x i, y j 0 > y j = t>y j S Ttt t S Ttt x i S Ctrl y j S Ctrl t + S Ctrl t 1,0 Patient i : censoring 0,5 Treatment group Control group Patient j : censoring 0,0 Time Efron, Berkeley Symp,
61 Extension prenant en compte les temps jusqu à censure (δ i, ε j ) x i y j > τ x i y j < τ x i y j < τ (1, 1) (0, 1) 1 S T y j + τ + S T y j τ S T (x i ) 1 S T y j + τ S T x i (1, 0) 1 S C x i + τ + S C x i τ S C (y j ) -1 S C x i + τ S C y j (0, 0) 1 S C x i τ + S C x i + τ S C y j t>x i τ t y j ε j =1 t>x i +τ t y j ε j =1 S T t + τ S T x i S C y j S T t τ S T x i S C y j ds C ds C t t t>y j t y j ε j =1 S T t + τ + S T t τ S T x i S C y j ds C t 1 t>y j t y j ε j =1 S C t>x i +τ t y j ε j =1 S C S T t + τ S T x i S C y j ds C t S T t τ S T x i S C y j x i + τ y j ds C t Valeurs du score attribué à chaque paire en fonction d un seuil τ représentant la différence minimale cliniquement significative 61
62 Sensitivity analysis proportion of pairs (%) Priority Threshold Erlotinib > Placebo > erlotinib Placebo Erlotinib 1 : OS 6 months : PFS 6 months : Worst related AE grade 3 grades : OS 3 months : PFS 3 months : Worst related AE grade 2 grades : OS 0 months : PFS 0 months : Worst related AE grade 1 grade Overall (P=.82) 62
63 Survival Probability Hypothesis of the correction 1,0 Treatment group Control group Censoring y j Event x i 0,0 Temps 63
64 With the standard procedure proportion of pairs (%) Priority Erlotinib > Placebo Placebo > Erlotinib erlotinib 1 : OS (Threshold = 2 months) : Worst related AE grade Overall (P=.51) Main analysis of the benefit-risk balance of the erlotinib and gemcitabine combination Péron J. Roy P. Ding K. Parulekar WR. Roche L and Buyse M. BJC
65 Sensitivity analysis Péron J. Roy P. Ding K. Parulekar WR. Roche L and Buyse M. BJC
66 Benefit-risk balance Standard procedure Priority Erlotinib > Placebo Placebo > Erlotinib [erlotinib] 1 : OS (Threshold = 2 months) 37.0 % 32.3 % 4.7 % 2 : Worst related AE grade 7.5 % 15.7 % -8.3 % Global 44.5 % 48.1 % -3.6% (P=.51) Extended procedure Priority Erlotinib > Placebo Placebo > Erlotinib [erlotinib] 1 : OS (Threshold = 2 months) 40.3 % 34.5 % 5.8 % 2 : Worst related AE grade 6.8 % 12.4 % -5.6 % Global 47.1 % 46.9 % 0.2 % (P=.96) Péron J. Roy P. Ding K. Parulekar WR. Roche L and Buyse M. BJC
67 Benefit-risk balance Standard procedure Extended procedure Péron J. Roy P. Ding K. Parulekar WR. Roche L and Buyse M. BJC
68 Benefit-risk balance PRODIGE 4 trial Priority FOLFIRINOX > Gemcitabine > [FOLFIRINOX] Gemcitabine FOLFIRINOX 1 : OS (Threshold = 2 months) 43.0% 21.7% 21.3% 2 : Worst related AE grade 8.2% 15.4% -7.2% Global 51.2% 37.1% 14.0% (P=0.029) 68
69 Benefit-risk balance PRODIGE 4 trial Priority FOLFIRINOX > Gemcitabine > [FOLFIRINOX] Gemcitabine FOLFIRINOX 1 : OS (Threshold = 2 months) 43.0% 21.7% 21.3% 2 : Worst related AE grade 8.2% 15.4% -7.2% Global 51.2% 37.1% 14.0% (P=0.029) NCIC PA-3 trial Priority Erlotinib > Placebo Placebo > Erlotinib [erlotinib] 1 : OS (Threshold = 2 months) 37.0 % 32.3 % 4.7 % 2 : Worst related AE grade 7.5 % 15.7 % -8.3 % Global 44.5 % 48.1 % -3.6% (P=.51) 69
70 NCIC PA-3 trial 70
Extensions of Cox Model for Non-Proportional Hazards Purpose
PhUSE Annual Conference 2013 Paper SP07 Extensions of Cox Model for Non-Proportional Hazards Purpose Author: Jadwiga Borucka PAREXEL, Warsaw, Poland Brussels 13 th - 16 th October 2013 Presentation Plan
More informationTwo-stage Adaptive Randomization for Delayed Response in Clinical Trials
Two-stage Adaptive Randomization for Delayed Response in Clinical Trials Guosheng Yin Department of Statistics and Actuarial Science The University of Hong Kong Joint work with J. Xu PSI and RSS Journal
More informationEstimation of Conditional Kendall s Tau for Bivariate Interval Censored Data
Communications for Statistical Applications and Methods 2015, Vol. 22, No. 6, 599 604 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5351/csam.2015.22.6.599 Print ISSN 2287-7843 / Online ISSN 2383-4757 Estimation of Conditional
More informationChapter 7 Fall Chapter 7 Hypothesis testing Hypotheses of interest: (A) 1-sample
Bios 323: Applied Survival Analysis Qingxia (Cindy) Chen Chapter 7 Fall 2012 Chapter 7 Hypothesis testing Hypotheses of interest: (A) 1-sample H 0 : S(t) = S 0 (t), where S 0 ( ) is known survival function,
More informationSample Size Determination
Sample Size Determination 018 The number of subjects in a clinical study should always be large enough to provide a reliable answer to the question(s addressed. The sample size is usually determined by
More informationPart IV Extensions: Competing Risks Endpoints and Non-Parametric AUC(t) Estimation
Part IV Extensions: Competing Risks Endpoints and Non-Parametric AUC(t) Estimation Patrick J. Heagerty PhD Department of Biostatistics University of Washington 166 ISCB 2010 Session Four Outline Examples
More informationSurvival Prediction Under Dependent Censoring: A Copula-based Approach
Survival Prediction Under Dependent Censoring: A Copula-based Approach Yi-Hau Chen Institute of Statistical Science, Academia Sinica 2013 AMMS, National Sun Yat-Sen University December 7 2013 Joint work
More informationGroup Sequential Tests for Delayed Responses. Christopher Jennison. Lisa Hampson. Workshop on Special Topics on Sequential Methodology
Group Sequential Tests for Delayed Responses Christopher Jennison Department of Mathematical Sciences, University of Bath, UK http://people.bath.ac.uk/mascj Lisa Hampson Department of Mathematics and Statistics,
More informationStatistics and Probability Letters. Using randomization tests to preserve type I error with response adaptive and covariate adaptive randomization
Statistics and Probability Letters ( ) Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Statistics and Probability Letters journal homepage: wwwelseviercom/locate/stapro Using randomization tests to preserve
More informationPart III. Hypothesis Testing. III.1. Log-rank Test for Right-censored Failure Time Data
1 Part III. Hypothesis Testing III.1. Log-rank Test for Right-censored Failure Time Data Consider a survival study consisting of n independent subjects from p different populations with survival functions
More informationarxiv: v1 [stat.me] 24 Jul 2013
arxiv:1307.6275v1 [stat.me] 24 Jul 2013 A Two-Stage, Phase II Clinical Trial Design with Nested Criteria for Early Stopping and Efficacy Daniel Zelterman Department of Biostatistics School of Epidemiology
More informationDuke University. Duke Biostatistics and Bioinformatics (B&B) Working Paper Series. Randomized Phase II Clinical Trials using Fisher s Exact Test
Duke University Duke Biostatistics and Bioinformatics (B&B) Working Paper Series Year 2010 Paper 7 Randomized Phase II Clinical Trials using Fisher s Exact Test Sin-Ho Jung sinho.jung@duke.edu This working
More informationPower and Sample Size Calculations with the Additive Hazards Model
Journal of Data Science 10(2012), 143-155 Power and Sample Size Calculations with the Additive Hazards Model Ling Chen, Chengjie Xiong, J. Philip Miller and Feng Gao Washington University School of Medicine
More informationEstimating Causal Effects of Organ Transplantation Treatment Regimes
Estimating Causal Effects of Organ Transplantation Treatment Regimes David M. Vock, Jeffrey A. Verdoliva Boatman Division of Biostatistics University of Minnesota July 31, 2018 1 / 27 Hot off the Press
More informationStatistical Aspects of Futility Analyses. Kevin J Carroll. nd 2013
Statistical Aspects of Futility Analyses Kevin J Carroll March Spring 222013 nd 2013 1 Contents Introduction The Problem in Statistical Terms Defining Futility Three Common Futility Rules The Maths An
More informationIntroduction to Crossover Trials
Introduction to Crossover Trials Stat 6500 Tutorial Project Isaac Blackhurst A crossover trial is a type of randomized control trial. It has advantages over other designed experiments because, under certain
More informationSAMPLE SIZE ESTIMATION FOR SURVIVAL OUTCOMES IN CLUSTER-RANDOMIZED STUDIES WITH SMALL CLUSTER SIZES BIOMETRICS (JUNE 2000)
SAMPLE SIZE ESTIMATION FOR SURVIVAL OUTCOMES IN CLUSTER-RANDOMIZED STUDIES WITH SMALL CLUSTER SIZES BIOMETRICS (JUNE 2000) AMITA K. MANATUNGA THE ROLLINS SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH OF EMORY UNIVERSITY SHANDE
More informationAccurate Sample Size Calculations in Trials with Non-Proportional Hazards
Accurate Sample Size Calculations in Trials with Non-Proportional Hazards James Bell Elderbrook Solutions GmbH PSI Conference - 4 th June 2018 Introduction Non-proportional hazards (NPH) are common in
More informationUsing a Counting Process Method to Impute Censored Follow-Up Time Data
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health Article Using a Counting Process Method to Impute Censored Follow-Up Time Data Jimmy T. Efird * and Charulata Jindal Centre for Clinical
More informationAdjusting for possibly misclassified causes of death in cause-specific survival analysis
Adjusting for possibly misclassified causes of death in cause-specific survival analysis Bart Van Rompaye Els Goetghebeur Department of Applied Mathematics and Computer Sciences Ghent University, BE 1
More informationPackage SimSCRPiecewise
Package SimSCRPiecewise July 27, 2016 Type Package Title 'Simulates Univariate and Semi-Competing Risks Data Given Covariates and Piecewise Exponential Baseline Hazards' Version 0.1.1 Author Andrew G Chapple
More informationNonparametric Model Construction
Nonparametric Model Construction Chapters 4 and 12 Stat 477 - Loss Models Chapters 4 and 12 (Stat 477) Nonparametric Model Construction Brian Hartman - BYU 1 / 28 Types of data Types of data For non-life
More information4. Comparison of Two (K) Samples
4. Comparison of Two (K) Samples K=2 Problem: compare the survival distributions between two groups. E: comparing treatments on patients with a particular disease. Z: Treatment indicator, i.e. Z = 1 for
More informationTowards stratified medicine instead of dichotomization, estimate a treatment effect function for a continuous covariate
Towards stratified medicine instead of dichotomization, estimate a treatment effect function for a continuous covariate Willi Sauerbrei 1, Patrick Royston 2 1 IMBI, University Medical Center Freiburg 2
More informationA Gate-keeping Approach for Selecting Adaptive Interventions under General SMART Designs
1 / 32 A Gate-keeping Approach for Selecting Adaptive Interventions under General SMART Designs Tony Zhong, DrPH Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai (Feb 20, 2019) Workshop on Design of mhealth Intervention
More informationLarge sample inference for a win ratio analysis of a composite outcome based on prioritized components
Biostatistics (2016), 17, 1,pp. 178 187 doi:10.1093/biostatistics/kxv032 Advance Access publication on September 8, 2015 Large sample inference for a win ratio analysis of a composite outcome based on
More informationComparing the effects of two treatments on two ordinal outcome variables
Working Papers in Statistics No 2015:16 Department of Statistics School of Economics and Management Lund University Comparing the effects of two treatments on two ordinal outcome variables VIBEKE HORSTMANN,
More informationA Generalized Global Rank Test for Multiple, Possibly Censored, Outcomes
A Generalized Global Rank Test for Multiple, Possibly Censored, Outcomes Ritesh Ramchandani Harvard School of Public Health August 5, 2014 Ritesh Ramchandani (HSPH) Global Rank Test for Multiple Outcomes
More informationNONPARAMETRIC ADJUSTMENT FOR MEASUREMENT ERROR IN TIME TO EVENT DATA: APPLICATION TO RISK PREDICTION MODELS
BIRS 2016 1 NONPARAMETRIC ADJUSTMENT FOR MEASUREMENT ERROR IN TIME TO EVENT DATA: APPLICATION TO RISK PREDICTION MODELS Malka Gorfine Tel Aviv University, Israel Joint work with Danielle Braun and Giovanni
More informationInstrumental variables estimation in the Cox Proportional Hazard regression model
Instrumental variables estimation in the Cox Proportional Hazard regression model James O Malley, Ph.D. Department of Biomedical Data Science The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice
More informationBayes Factor Single Arm Time-to-event User s Guide (Version 1.0.0)
Bayes Factor Single Arm Time-to-event User s Guide (Version 1.0.0) Department of Biostatistics P. O. Box 301402, Unit 1409 The University of Texas, M. D. Anderson Cancer Center Houston, Texas 77230-1402,
More informationProbabilistic Index Models
Probabilistic Index Models Jan De Neve Department of Data Analysis Ghent University M3 Storrs, Conneticut, USA May 23, 2017 Jan.DeNeve@UGent.be 1 / 37 Introduction 2 / 37 Introduction to Probabilistic
More informationChapter 4 Fall Notations: t 1 < t 2 < < t D, D unique death times. d j = # deaths at t j = n. Y j = # at risk /alive at t j = n
Bios 323: Applied Survival Analysis Qingxia (Cindy) Chen Chapter 4 Fall 2012 4.2 Estimators of the survival and cumulative hazard functions for RC data Suppose X is a continuous random failure time with
More informationLecture 7 Time-dependent Covariates in Cox Regression
Lecture 7 Time-dependent Covariates in Cox Regression So far, we ve been considering the following Cox PH model: λ(t Z) = λ 0 (t) exp(β Z) = λ 0 (t) exp( β j Z j ) where β j is the parameter for the the
More informationPairwise rank based likelihood for estimating the relationship between two homogeneous populations and their mixture proportion
Pairwise rank based likelihood for estimating the relationship between two homogeneous populations and their mixture proportion Glenn Heller and Jing Qin Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics Memorial
More informationInterim Monitoring of Clinical Trials: Decision Theory, Dynamic Programming. and Optimal Stopping
Interim Monitoring of Clinical Trials: Decision Theory, Dynamic Programming and Optimal Stopping Christopher Jennison Department of Mathematical Sciences, University of Bath, UK http://people.bath.ac.uk/mascj
More informationMonitoring clinical trial outcomes with delayed response: incorporating pipeline data in group sequential designs. Christopher Jennison
Monitoring clinical trial outcomes with delayed response: incorporating pipeline data in group sequential designs Christopher Jennison Department of Mathematical Sciences, University of Bath http://people.bath.ac.uk/mascj
More informationStatistical Methods for Alzheimer s Disease Studies
Statistical Methods for Alzheimer s Disease Studies Rebecca A. Betensky, Ph.D. Department of Biostatistics, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health July 19, 2016 1/37 OUTLINE 1 Statistical collaborations
More informationUniversity of California, Berkeley
University of California, Berkeley U.C. Berkeley Division of Biostatistics Working Paper Series Year 2009 Paper 248 Application of Time-to-Event Methods in the Assessment of Safety in Clinical Trials Kelly
More informationLecture 11. Interval Censored and. Discrete-Time Data. Statistics Survival Analysis. Presented March 3, 2016
Statistics 255 - Survival Analysis Presented March 3, 2016 Motivating Dan Gillen Department of Statistics University of California, Irvine 11.1 First question: Are the data truly discrete? : Number of
More informationAdaptive clinical trials with subgroup selection
Adaptive clinical trials with subgroup selection Nigel Stallard 1, Tim Friede 2, Nick Parsons 1 1 Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK 2 University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen,
More informationOptimising Group Sequential Designs. Decision Theory, Dynamic Programming. and Optimal Stopping
: Decision Theory, Dynamic Programming and Optimal Stopping Christopher Jennison Department of Mathematical Sciences, University of Bath, UK http://people.bath.ac.uk/mascj InSPiRe Conference on Methodology
More informationTESTS FOR LOCATION WITH K SAMPLES UNDER THE KOZIOL-GREEN MODEL OF RANDOM CENSORSHIP Key Words: Ke Wu Department of Mathematics University of Mississip
TESTS FOR LOCATION WITH K SAMPLES UNDER THE KOIOL-GREEN MODEL OF RANDOM CENSORSHIP Key Words: Ke Wu Department of Mathematics University of Mississippi University, MS38677 K-sample location test, Koziol-Green
More informationPower assessment in group sequential design with multiple biomarker subgroups for multiplicity problem
Power assessment in group sequential design with multiple biomarker subgroups for multiplicity problem Lei Yang, Ph.D. Statistical Scientist, Roche (China) Holding Ltd. Aug 30 th 2018, Shanghai Jiao Tong
More informationLecture Outline. Biost 518 Applied Biostatistics II. Choice of Model for Analysis. Choice of Model. Choice of Model. Lecture 10: Multiple Regression:
Biost 518 Applied Biostatistics II Scott S. Emerson, M.D., Ph.D. Professor of Biostatistics University of Washington Lecture utline Choice of Model Alternative Models Effect of data driven selection of
More informationSample Size/Power Calculation by Software/Online Calculators
Sample Size/Power Calculation by Software/Online Calculators May 24, 2018 Li Zhang, Ph.D. li.zhang@ucsf.edu Associate Professor Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics Division of Hematology and Oncology
More informationThe Design of a Survival Study
The Design of a Survival Study The design of survival studies are usually based on the logrank test, and sometimes assumes the exponential distribution. As in standard designs, the power depends on The
More informationSample Size Calculations
Sample Size Calculations Analyses rely on means rather than individual values Means are more precise Precision measured by σ n So precision depends on n This can be used, directly or indirectly, as a basis
More informationThe miss rate for the analysis of gene expression data
Biostatistics (2005), 6, 1,pp. 111 117 doi: 10.1093/biostatistics/kxh021 The miss rate for the analysis of gene expression data JONATHAN TAYLOR Department of Statistics, Stanford University, Stanford,
More informationValida&on of Predic&ve Classifiers
Valida&on of Predic&ve Classifiers 1! Predic&ve Biomarker Classifiers In most posi&ve clinical trials, only a small propor&on of the eligible popula&on benefits from the new rx Many chronic diseases are
More informationIndividualized Treatment Effects with Censored Data via Nonparametric Accelerated Failure Time Models
Individualized Treatment Effects with Censored Data via Nonparametric Accelerated Failure Time Models Nicholas C. Henderson Thomas A. Louis Gary Rosner Ravi Varadhan Johns Hopkins University July 31, 2018
More informationUniversity of California, Berkeley
University of California, Berkeley U.C. Berkeley Division of Biostatistics Working Paper Series Year 2010 Paper 267 Optimizing Randomized Trial Designs to Distinguish which Subpopulations Benefit from
More informationSample size re-estimation in clinical trials. Dealing with those unknowns. Chris Jennison. University of Kyoto, January 2018
Sample Size Re-estimation in Clinical Trials: Dealing with those unknowns Christopher Jennison Department of Mathematical Sciences, University of Bath, UK http://people.bath.ac.uk/mascj University of Kyoto,
More informationMultistate models and recurrent event models
and recurrent event models Patrick Breheny December 6 Patrick Breheny University of Iowa Survival Data Analysis (BIOS:7210) 1 / 22 Introduction In this final lecture, we will briefly look at two other
More informationPrerequisite: STATS 7 or STATS 8 or AP90 or (STATS 120A and STATS 120B and STATS 120C). AP90 with a minimum score of 3
University of California, Irvine 2017-2018 1 Statistics (STATS) Courses STATS 5. Seminar in Data Science. 1 Unit. An introduction to the field of Data Science; intended for entering freshman and transfers.
More informationA multi-state model for the prognosis of non-mild acute pancreatitis
A multi-state model for the prognosis of non-mild acute pancreatitis Lore Zumeta Olaskoaga 1, Felix Zubia Olaskoaga 2, Marta Bofill Roig 1, Guadalupe Gómez Melis 1 1 Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya
More informationAnalysis of competing risks data and simulation of data following predened subdistribution hazards
Analysis of competing risks data and simulation of data following predened subdistribution hazards Bernhard Haller Institut für Medizinische Statistik und Epidemiologie Technische Universität München 27.05.2013
More informationStatistics in medicine
Statistics in medicine Lecture 4: and multivariable regression Fatma Shebl, MD, MS, MPH, PhD Assistant Professor Chronic Disease Epidemiology Department Yale School of Public Health Fatma.shebl@yale.edu
More informationOverrunning in Clinical Trials: a Methodological Review
Overrunning in Clinical Trials: a Methodological Review Dario Gregori Unit of Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Public Health Department of Cardiac, Thoracic and Vascular Sciences dario.gregori@unipd.it
More informationGroup Sequential Designs: Theory, Computation and Optimisation
Group Sequential Designs: Theory, Computation and Optimisation Christopher Jennison Department of Mathematical Sciences, University of Bath, UK http://people.bath.ac.uk/mascj 8th International Conference
More informationBNP survival regression with variable dimension covariate vector
BNP survival regression with variable dimension covariate vector Peter Müller, UT Austin Survival 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 Truth Estimate Survival 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 Truth Estimate BC, BRAF TT (left),
More informationGoodness-of-fit tests for randomly censored Weibull distributions with estimated parameters
Communications for Statistical Applications and Methods 2017, Vol. 24, No. 5, 519 531 https://doi.org/10.5351/csam.2017.24.5.519 Print ISSN 2287-7843 / Online ISSN 2383-4757 Goodness-of-fit tests for randomly
More informationEstimating the Mean Response of Treatment Duration Regimes in an Observational Study. Anastasios A. Tsiatis.
Estimating the Mean Response of Treatment Duration Regimes in an Observational Study Anastasios A. Tsiatis http://www.stat.ncsu.edu/ tsiatis/ Introduction to Dynamic Treatment Regimes 1 Outline Description
More informationCausal Hazard Ratio Estimation By Instrumental Variables or Principal Stratification. Todd MacKenzie, PhD
Causal Hazard Ratio Estimation By Instrumental Variables or Principal Stratification Todd MacKenzie, PhD Collaborators A. James O Malley Tor Tosteson Therese Stukel 2 Overview 1. Instrumental variable
More informationPower and Sample Size Calculations for the Wilcoxon Mann Whitney Test in the Presence of Missing Observations due to Death
Research Article Received XXXX (www.interscience.wiley.com) DOI: 10.1002/sim.0000 Power and Sample Size Calculations for the Wilcoxon Mann Whitney Test in the Presence of Missing Observations due to Death
More informationSurvival Analysis. Stat 526. April 13, 2018
Survival Analysis Stat 526 April 13, 2018 1 Functions of Survival Time Let T be the survival time for a subject Then P [T < 0] = 0 and T is a continuous random variable The Survival function is defined
More informationβ j = coefficient of x j in the model; β = ( β1, β2,
Regression Modeling of Survival Time Data Why regression models? Groups similar except for the treatment under study use the nonparametric methods discussed earlier. Groups differ in variables (covariates)
More informationMAS3301 / MAS8311 Biostatistics Part II: Survival
MAS3301 / MAS8311 Biostatistics Part II: Survival M. Farrow School of Mathematics and Statistics Newcastle University Semester 2, 2009-10 1 13 The Cox proportional hazards model 13.1 Introduction In the
More informationTechnical Manual. 1 Introduction. 1.1 Version. 1.2 Developer
Technical Manual 1 Introduction 1 2 TraditionalSampleSize module: Analytical calculations in fixed-sample trials 3 3 TraditionalSimulations module: Simulation-based calculations in fixed-sample trials
More informationPubh 8482: Sequential Analysis
Pubh 8482: Sequential Analysis Joseph S. Koopmeiners Division of Biostatistics University of Minnesota Week 12 Review So far... We have discussed the role of phase III clinical trials in drug development
More informationImplementing Response-Adaptive Randomization in Multi-Armed Survival Trials
Implementing Response-Adaptive Randomization in Multi-Armed Survival Trials BASS Conference 2009 Alex Sverdlov, Bristol-Myers Squibb A.Sverdlov (B-MS) Response-Adaptive Randomization 1 / 35 Joint work
More informationMaster s Written Examination - Solution
Master s Written Examination - Solution Spring 204 Problem Stat 40 Suppose X and X 2 have the joint pdf f X,X 2 (x, x 2 ) = 2e (x +x 2 ), 0 < x < x 2
More informationLecture 9: Learning Optimal Dynamic Treatment Regimes. Donglin Zeng, Department of Biostatistics, University of North Carolina
Lecture 9: Learning Optimal Dynamic Treatment Regimes Introduction Refresh: Dynamic Treatment Regimes (DTRs) DTRs: sequential decision rules, tailored at each stage by patients time-varying features and
More informationMultistate models and recurrent event models
Multistate models Multistate models and recurrent event models Patrick Breheny December 10 Patrick Breheny Survival Data Analysis (BIOS 7210) 1/22 Introduction Multistate models In this final lecture,
More informationQuantile Regression for Residual Life and Empirical Likelihood
Quantile Regression for Residual Life and Empirical Likelihood Mai Zhou email: mai@ms.uky.edu Department of Statistics, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY 40506-0027, USA Jong-Hyeon Jeong email: jeong@nsabp.pitt.edu
More informationSample Size Estimation for Studies of High-Dimensional Data
Sample Size Estimation for Studies of High-Dimensional Data James J. Chen, Ph.D. National Center for Toxicological Research Food and Drug Administration June 3, 2009 China Medical University Taichung,
More informationSTAT331. Cox s Proportional Hazards Model
STAT331 Cox s Proportional Hazards Model In this unit we introduce Cox s proportional hazards (Cox s PH) model, give a heuristic development of the partial likelihood function, and discuss adaptations
More informationEffect of investigator bias on the significance level of the Wilcoxon rank-sum test
Biostatistics 000, 1, 1,pp. 107 111 Printed in Great Britain Effect of investigator bias on the significance level of the Wilcoxon rank-sum test PAUL DELUCCA Biometrician, Merck & Co., Inc., 1 Walnut Grove
More informationA multi-state model for the prognosis of non-mild acute pancreatitis
A multi-state model for the prognosis of non-mild acute pancreatitis Lore Zumeta Olaskoaga 1, Felix Zubia Olaskoaga 2, Guadalupe Gómez Melis 1 1 Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya 2 Intensive Care Unit,
More informationAdaptive Survival Trials
arxiv:1405.1569v1 [stat.ap] 7 May 2014 Adaptive Survival Trials Dominic Magirr 1, Thomas Jaki 2, Franz Koenig 1, and Martin Posch 1 1 Section for Medical Statistics, Medical University of Vienna, Austria
More informationA Bayesian Nonparametric Approach to Monotone Missing Data in Longitudinal Studies with Informative Missingness
A Bayesian Nonparametric Approach to Monotone Missing Data in Longitudinal Studies with Informative Missingness A. Linero and M. Daniels UF, UT-Austin SRC 2014, Galveston, TX 1 Background 2 Working model
More informationRelative-risk regression and model diagnostics. 16 November, 2015
Relative-risk regression and model diagnostics 16 November, 2015 Relative risk regression More general multiplicative intensity model: Intensity for individual i at time t is i(t) =Y i (t)r(x i, ; t) 0
More informationCHL 5225H Advanced Statistical Methods for Clinical Trials: Multiplicity
CHL 5225H Advanced Statistical Methods for Clinical Trials: Multiplicity Prof. Kevin E. Thorpe Dept. of Public Health Sciences University of Toronto Objectives 1. Be able to distinguish among the various
More informationEVALUATING THE REPEATABILITY OF TWO STUDIES OF A LARGE NUMBER OF OBJECTS: MODIFIED KENDALL RANK-ORDER ASSOCIATION TEST
EVALUATING THE REPEATABILITY OF TWO STUDIES OF A LARGE NUMBER OF OBJECTS: MODIFIED KENDALL RANK-ORDER ASSOCIATION TEST TIAN ZHENG, SHAW-HWA LO DEPARTMENT OF STATISTICS, COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY Abstract. In
More informationThe influence of categorising survival time on parameter estimates in a Cox model
The influence of categorising survival time on parameter estimates in a Cox model Anika Buchholz 1,2, Willi Sauerbrei 2, Patrick Royston 3 1 Freiburger Zentrum für Datenanalyse und Modellbildung, Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
More informationCausal-inference and Meta-analytic Approaches to Surrogate Endpoint Validation
Causal-inference and Meta-analytic Approaches to Surrogate Endpoint Validation Tomasz Burzykowski I-BioStat, Hasselt University, Belgium, and International Drug Development Institute (IDDI), Belgium tomasz.burzykowski@uhasselt.be
More informationA Clinical Trial Simulation System, Its Applications, and Future Challenges. Peter Westfall, Texas Tech University Kuenhi Tsai, Merck Research Lab
A Clinical Trial Simulation System, Its Applications, and Future Challenges Peter Westfall, Texas Tech University Kuenhi Tsai, Merck Research Lab Acknowledgement Major collaborators Stephan Ogenstand,
More informationImproving Efficiency of Inferences in Randomized Clinical Trials Using Auxiliary Covariates
Improving Efficiency of Inferences in Randomized Clinical Trials Using Auxiliary Covariates Anastasios (Butch) Tsiatis Department of Statistics North Carolina State University http://www.stat.ncsu.edu/
More informationRobustifying Trial-Derived Treatment Rules to a Target Population
1/ 39 Robustifying Trial-Derived Treatment Rules to a Target Population Yingqi Zhao Public Health Sciences Division Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center Workshop on Perspectives and Analysis for Personalized
More informationPractical considerations for survival models
Including historical data in the analysis of clinical trials using the modified power prior Practical considerations for survival models David Dejardin 1 2, Joost van Rosmalen 3 and Emmanuel Lesaffre 1
More informationa Sample By:Dr.Hoseyn Falahzadeh 1
In the name of God Determining ee the esize eof a Sample By:Dr.Hoseyn Falahzadeh 1 Sample Accuracy Sample accuracy: refers to how close a random sample s statistic is to the true population s value it
More informationStatistical Analysis of Competing Risks With Missing Causes of Failure
Proceedings 59th ISI World Statistics Congress, 25-3 August 213, Hong Kong (Session STS9) p.1223 Statistical Analysis of Competing Risks With Missing Causes of Failure Isha Dewan 1,3 and Uttara V. Naik-Nimbalkar
More informationMultivariate Survival Analysis
Multivariate Survival Analysis Previously we have assumed that either (X i, δ i ) or (X i, δ i, Z i ), i = 1,..., n, are i.i.d.. This may not always be the case. Multivariate survival data can arise in
More informationMulti-state models: prediction
Department of Medical Statistics and Bioinformatics Leiden University Medical Center Course on advanced survival analysis, Copenhagen Outline Prediction Theory Aalen-Johansen Computational aspects Applications
More informationSample Size and Power I: Binary Outcomes. James Ware, PhD Harvard School of Public Health Boston, MA
Sample Size and Power I: Binary Outcomes James Ware, PhD Harvard School of Public Health Boston, MA Sample Size and Power Principles: Sample size calculations are an essential part of study design Consider
More informationLinear rank statistics
Linear rank statistics Comparison of two groups. Consider the failure time T ij of j-th subject in the i-th group for i = 1 or ; the first group is often called control, and the second treatment. Let n
More informationGeneralizing the MCPMod methodology beyond normal, independent data
Generalizing the MCPMod methodology beyond normal, independent data José Pinheiro Joint work with Frank Bretz and Björn Bornkamp Novartis AG Trends and Innovations in Clinical Trial Statistics Conference
More informationPhD course in Advanced survival analysis. One-sample tests. Properties. Idea: (ABGK, sect. V.1.1) Counting process N(t)
PhD course in Advanced survival analysis. (ABGK, sect. V.1.1) One-sample tests. Counting process N(t) Non-parametric hypothesis tests. Parametric models. Intensity process λ(t) = α(t)y (t) satisfying Aalen
More informationHOW TO DETERMINE THE NUMBER OF SUBJECTS NEEDED FOR MY STUDY?
HOW TO DETERMINE THE NUMBER OF SUBJECTS NEEDED FOR MY STUDY? TUTORIAL ON SAMPLE SIZE AND POWER CALCULATIONS FOR INEQUALITY TESTS. John Zavrakidis j.zavrakidis@nki.nl May 28, 2018 J.Zavrakidis Sample and
More informationIntroduction to Statistical Analysis
Introduction to Statistical Analysis Changyu Shen Richard A. and Susan F. Smith Center for Outcomes Research in Cardiology Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center Harvard Medical School Objectives Descriptive
More information