Search

Limitations of using the traditional Cox's hazard ratio for summarizing the magnitude of the treatment effect on time-to-event outcomes have been widely discussed, and alternative measures that do not have such limitations are gaining attention. One of the alternative methods recently proposed, in a simple 2-sample comparison setting, uses the average hazard with survival weight (AH), which can be interpreted as the general censoring-free person-time incidence rate on a given time window. In this paper, we propose a new regression analysis approach for the AH with a truncation time τ. We investigate 3 versions of AH regression analysis, assuming (1) independent censoring, (2) group-specific censoring, and (3) covariate-dependent censoring. The proposed AH regression methods are closely related to robust Poisson regression. While the new approach needs to require a truncation time τ explicitly, it can be more robust than Poisson regression in the presence of censoring. With the AH regression approach, one can summarize the between-group treatment difference in both absolute difference and relative terms, adjusting for covariates that are associated with the outcome. This property will increase the likelihood that the treatment effect magnitude is correctly interpreted. The AH regression approach can be a useful alternative to the traditional Cox's hazard ratio approach for estimating and reporting the magnitude of the treatment effect on time-to-event outcomes., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The International Biometric Society.)

The t-year mean survival or restricted mean survival time (RMST) has been used as an appealing summary of the survival distribution within a time window [0, t]. RMST is the patient's life expectancy until time t and can be estimated nonparametrically by the area under the Kaplan-Meier curve up to t. In a comparative study, the difference or ratio of two RMSTs has been utilized to quantify the between-group-difference as a clinically interpretable alternative summary to the hazard ratio. The choice of the time window [0, t] may be prespecified at the design stage of the study based on clinical considerations. On the other hand, after the survival data have been collected, the choice of time point t could be data-dependent. The standard inferential procedures for the corresponding RMST, which is also data-dependent, ignore this subtle yet important issue. In this paper, we clarify how to make inference about a random "parameter." Moreover, we demonstrate that under a rather mild condition on the censoring distribution, one can make inference about the RMST up to t, where t is less than or even equal to the largest follow-up time (either observed or censored) in the study. This finding reduces the subjectivity of the choice of t empirically. The proposal is illustrated with the survival data from a primary biliary cirrhosis study, and its finite sample properties are investigated via an extensive simulation study., (© 2020 The International Biometric Society.)

In comparing two treatments with the event time observations, the hazard ratio (HR) estimate is routinely used to quantify the treatment difference. However, this model dependent estimate may be difficult to interpret clinically especially when the proportional hazards (PH) assumption is violated. An alternative estimation procedure for treatment efficacy based on the restricted means survival time or t-year mean survival time (t-MST) has been discussed extensively in the statistical and clinical literature. On the other hand, a statistical test via the HR or its asymptotically equivalent counterpart, the logrank test, is asymptotically distribution-free. In this article, we assess the relative efficiency of the hazard ratio and t-MST tests with respect to the statistical power under various PH and non-PH models theoretically and empirically. When the PH assumption is valid, the t-MST test performs almost as well as the HR test. For non-PH models, the t-MST test can substantially outperform its HR counterpart. On the other hand, the HR test can be powerful when the true difference of two survival functions is quite large at end but not the beginning of the study. Unfortunately, for this case, the HR estimate may not have a simple clinical interpretation for the treatment effect due to the violation of the PH assumption., (© 2017, The International Biometric Society.)

For a study with an event time as the endpoint, its survival function contains all the information regarding the temporal, stochastic profile of this outcome variable. The survival probability at a specific time point, say t, however, does not transparently capture the temporal profile of this endpoint up to t. An alternative is to use the restricted mean survival time (RMST) at time t to summarize the profile. The RMST is the mean survival time of all subjects in the study population followed up to t, and is simply the area under the survival curve up to t. The advantages of using such a quantification over the survival rate have been discussed in the setting of a fixed-time analysis. In this article, we generalize this approach by considering a curve based on the RMST over time as an alternative summary to the survival function. Inference, for instance, based on simultaneous confidence bands for a single RMST curve and also the difference between two RMST curves are proposed. The latter is informative for evaluating two groups under an equivalence or noninferiority setting, and quantifies the difference of two groups in a time scale. The proposal is illustrated with the data from two clinical trials, one from oncology and the other from cardiology., (© 2015, The International Biometric Society.)

In clinical follow-up studies with a time-to-event end point, the difference in the restricted mean survival time (RMST) is a suitable substitute for the hazard ratio (HR). However, the RMST only measures the survival of patients over a period of time from the baseline and cannot reflect changes in life expectancy over time. Based on the RMST, we study the conditional restricted mean survival time (cRMST) by estimating life expectancy in the future according to the time that patients have survived, reflecting the dynamic survival status of patients during follow-up. In this paper, we introduce the estimation method of cRMST based on pseudo-observations, the statistical inference concerning the difference between two cRMSTs (cRMSTd), and the establishment of the robust dynamic prediction model using the landmark method. Simulation studies are conducted to evaluate the statistical properties of these methods. The results indicate that the estimation of the cRMST is accurate, and the dynamic RMST model has high accuracy in coefficient estimation and good predictive performance. In addition, an example of patients with chronic kidney disease who received renal transplantations is employed to illustrate that the dynamic RMST model can predict patients' expected survival times from any prediction time, considering the time-dependent covariates and time-varying effects of covariates., (© 2023 The International Biometric Society.)

Quantitative procedures for evaluating added values from new markers over a conventional risk scoring system for predicting event rates at specific time points have been extensively studied. However, a single summary statistic, for example, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve or its derivatives, may not provide a clear picture about the relationship between the conventional and the new risk scoring systems. When there are no censored event time observations in the data, two simple scatterplots with individual conventional and new scores for "cases" and "controls" provide valuable information regarding the overall and the subject-specific level incremental values from the new markers. Unfortunately, in the presence of censoring, it is not clear how to construct such plots. In this article, we propose a nonparametric estimation procedure for the distributions of the differences between two risk scores conditional on the conventional score. The resulting quantile curves of these differences over the subject-specific conventional score provide extra information about the overall added value from the new marker. They also help us to identify a subgroup of future subjects who need the new predictors, especially when there is no unified utility function available for cost-risk-benefit decision making. The procedure is illustrated with two data sets. The first is from a well-known Mayo Clinic primary biliary cirrhosis liver study. The second is from a recent breast cancer study on evaluating the added value from a gene score, which is relatively expensive to measure compared with the routinely used clinical biomarkers for predicting the patient's survival after surgery., (© 2011, The International Biometric Society.)

The restricted mean survival time (RMST) evaluates the expectation of survival time truncated by a prespecified time point, because the mean survival time in the presence of censoring is typically not estimable. The frequentist inference procedure for RMST has been widely advocated for comparison of two survival curves, while research from the Bayesian perspective is rather limited. For the RMST of both right- and interval-censored data, we propose Bayesian nonparametric estimation and inference procedures. By assigning a mixture of Dirichlet processes (MDP) prior to the distribution function, we can estimate the posterior distribution of RMST. We also explore another Bayesian nonparametric approach using the Dirichlet process mixture model and make comparisons with the frequentist nonparametric method. Simulation studies demonstrate that the Bayesian nonparametric RMST under diffuse MDP priors leads to robust estimation and under informative priors it can incorporate prior knowledge into the nonparametric estimator. Analysis of real trial examples demonstrates the flexibility and interpretability of the Bayesian nonparametric RMST for both right- and interval-censored data., (© 2022 The International Biometric Society.)

In disease settings where study participants are at risk for death and a serious nonfatal event, composite endpoints defined as the time until the earliest of death or the nonfatal event are often used as the primary endpoint in clinical trials. In practice, if the nonfatal event can only be detected at clinic visits and the death time is known exactly, the resulting composite endpoint exhibits "component-wise censoring." The standard method used to estimate event-free survival in this setting fails to account for component-wise censoring. We apply a kernel smoothing method previously proposed for a marker process in a novel way to produce a nonparametric estimator for event-free survival that accounts for component-wise censoring. The key insight that allows us to apply this kernel method is thinking of nonfatal event status as an intermittently observed binary time-dependent variable rather than thinking of time to the nonfatal event as interval-censored. We also propose estimators for the probability in state and restricted mean time in state for reversible or irreversible illness-death models, under component-wise censoring, and derive their large-sample properties. We perform a simulation study to compare our method to existing multistate survival methods and apply the methods on data from a large randomized trial studying a multifactor intervention for reducing morbidity and mortality among men at above average risk of coronary heart disease., (© 2021 The International Biometric Society.)

Competing risks data are commonly encountered in randomized clinical trials and observational studies. This paper considers the situation where the ending statuses of competing events have different clinical interpretations and/or are of simultaneous interest. In clinical trials, often more than one competing event has meaningful clinical interpretations even though the trial effects of different events could be different or even opposite to each other. In this paper, we develop estimation procedures and inferential properties for the joint use of multiple cumulative incidence functions (CIFs). Additionally, by incorporating longitudinal marker information, we develop estimation and inference procedures for weighted CIFs and related metrics. The proposed methods are applied to a COVID‐19 in‐patient treatment clinical trial, where the outcomes of COVID‐19 hospitalization are either death or discharge from the hospital, two competing events with completely different clinical implications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the context of time‐to‐event analysis, a primary objective is to model the risk of experiencing a particular event in relation to a set of observed predictors. The Concordance Index (C‐Index) is a statistic frequently used in practice to assess how well such models discriminate between various risk levels in a population. However, the properties of conventional C‐Index estimators when applied to left‐truncated time‐to‐event data have not been well studied, despite the fact that left‐truncation is commonly encountered in observational studies. We show that the limiting values of the conventional C‐Index estimators depend on the underlying distribution of truncation times, which is similar to the situation with right‐censoring as discussed in Uno et al. (2011) [On the C‐statistics for evaluating overall adequacy of risk prediction procedures with censored survival data. Statistics in Medicine 30(10), 1105–1117]. We develop a new C‐Index estimator based on inverse probability weighting (IPW) that corrects for this limitation, and we generalize this estimator to settings with left‐truncated and right‐censored data. The proposed IPW estimators are highly robust to the underlying truncation distribution and often outperform the conventional methods in terms of bias, mean squared error, and coverage probability. We apply these estimators to evaluate a predictive survival model for mortality among patients with end‐stage renal disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Measuring the treatment effect on recurrent events like hospitalization in the presence of death has long challenged statisticians and clinicians alike. Traditional inference on the cumulative frequency unjustly penalizes survivorship as longer survivors also tend to experience more adverse events. Expanding a recently suggested idea of the "while‐alive" event rate, we consider a general class of such estimands that adjust for the length of survival without losing causal interpretation. Given a user‐specified loss function that allows for arbitrary weighting, we define as estimand the average loss experienced per unit time alive within a target period and use the ratio of this loss rate to measure the effect size. Scaling the loss rate by the width of the corresponding time window gives us an alternative, and sometimes more photogenic, way of showing the data. To make inferences, we construct a nonparametric estimator for the loss rate through the cumulative loss and the restricted mean survival time and derive its influence function in closed form for variance estimation and testing. As simulations and analysis of real data from a heart failure trial both show, the while‐alive approach corrects for the false attenuation of treatment effect due to patients living longer under treatment, with increased statistical power as a result. The proposed methods are implemented in the R‐package WA, which is publicly available from the Comprehensive R Archive Network (CRAN). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Screening mammography aims to identify breast cancer early and secondarily measures breast density to classify women at higher or lower than average risk for future breast cancer in the general population. Despite the strong association of individual mammography features to breast cancer risk, the statistical literature on mammogram imaging data is limited. While functional principal component analysis (FPCA) has been studied in the literature for extracting image‐based features, it is conducted independently of the time‐to‐event response variable. With the consideration of building a prognostic model for precision prevention, we present a set of flexible methods, supervised FPCA (sFPCA) and functional partial least squares (FPLS), to extract image‐based features associated with the failure time while accommodating the added complication from right censoring. Throughout the article, we hope to demonstrate that one method is favored over the other under different clinical setups. The proposed methods are applied to the motivating data set from the Joanne Knight Breast Health cohort at Siteman Cancer Center. Our approaches not only obtain the best prediction performance compared to the benchmark model, but also reveal different risk patterns within the mammograms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Readily available proxies for the time of disease onset such as the time of the first diagnostic code can lead to substantial risk prediction error if performing analyses based on poor proxies. Due to the lack of detailed documentation and labor intensiveness of manual annotation, it is often only feasible to ascertain for a small subset the current status of the disease by a follow‐up time rather than the exact time. In this paper, we aim to develop risk prediction models for the onset time efficiently leveraging both a small number of labels on the current status and a large number of unlabeled observations on imperfect proxies. Under a semiparametric transformation model for onset and a highly flexible measurement error model for proxy onset time, we propose the semisupervised risk prediction method by combining information from proxies and limited labels efficiently. From an initially estimator solely based on the labeled subset, we perform a one‐step correction with the full data augmenting against a mean zero rank correlation score derived from the proxies. We establish the consistency and asymptotic normality of the proposed semisupervised estimator and provide a resampling procedure for interval estimation. Simulation studies demonstrate that the proposed estimator performs well in a finite sample. We illustrate the proposed estimator by developing a genetic risk prediction model for obesity using data from Mass General Brigham Healthcare Biobank. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The restricted mean time in favor (RMT‐IF) of treatment is a nonparametric effect size for complex life history data. It is defined as the net average time the treated spend in a more favorable state than the untreated over a prespecified time window. It generalizes the familiar restricted mean survival time (RMST) from the two‐state life–death model to account for intermediate stages in disease progression. The overall estimand can be additively decomposed into stage‐wise effects, with the standard RMST as a component. Alternate expressions of the overall and stage‐wise estimands as integrals of the marginal survival functions for a sequence of landmark transitioning events allow them to be easily estimated by plug‐in Kaplan–Meier estimators. The dynamic profile of the estimated treatment effects as a function of follow‐up time can be visualized using a multilayer, cone‐shaped "bouquet plot." Simulation studies under realistic settings show that the RMT‐IF meaningfully and accurately quantifies the treatment effect and outperforms traditional tests on time to the first event in statistical efficiency thanks to its fuller utilization of patient data. The new methods are illustrated on a colon cancer trial with relapse and death as outcomes and a cardiovascular trial with recurrent hospitalizations and death as outcomes. The R‐package rmt implements the proposed methodology and is publicly available from the Comprehensive R Archive Network (CRAN). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

G-estimation of structural nested models (SNMs) plays an important role in estimating the effects of time-varying treatments with appropriate adjustment for time-dependent confounding. As SNMs for a failure time outcome, structural nested accelerated failure time models (SNAFTMs) and structural nested cumulative failure time models have been developed. The latter models are included in the class of structural nested mean models (SNMMs) and are not involved in artificial censoring, which induces several difficulties in g-estimation of SNAFTMs. Recently, restricted mean time lost (RMTL), which corresponds to the area under a distribution function up to a restriction time, is attracting attention in clinical trial communities as an appropriate summary measure of a failure time outcome. In this study, we propose another SNMM for a failure time outcome, which is called structural nested RMTL model (SNRMTLM) and describe randomized and observational g-estimation procedures that use different assumptions for the treatment mechanism in a randomized trial setting. We also provide methods to estimate marginal RMTLs under static treatment regimes using estimated SNRMTLMs. A simulation study evaluates finite-sample performances of the proposed methods compared with the conventional intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses. We illustrate the proposed methods using data from a randomized controlled trial for cardiovascular disease with treatment changes. G-estimation of SNRMTLMs is a useful tool to estimate the effects of time-varying treatments on a failure time outcome., (© 2019 The International Biometric Society.)

Asymptotic distributions under alternative hypotheses and their corresponding sample size and power equations are derived for nonparametric test statistics commonly used to compare two survival curves. Test statistics include the weighted log-rank test and the Wald test for difference in (or ratio of) Kaplan-Meier survival probability, percentile survival, and restricted mean survival time. Accrual, survival, and loss to follow-up are allowed to follow any arbitrary continuous distribution. We show that Schoenfeld's equation-often used by practitioners to calculate the required number of events for the unweighted log-rank test-can be inaccurate even when the proportional hazards (PH) assumption holds. In fact, it can mislead one to believe that 1:1 is the optimal randomization ratio (RR), when actually power can be gained by assigning more patients to the active arm. Meaningful improvements to Schoenfeld's equation are made. The present theory should be useful in designing clinical trials, particularly in immuno-oncology where nonproportional hazards are frequently encountered. We illustrate the application of our theory with an example exploring optimal RR under PH and a second example examining the impact of delayed treatment effect. A companion R package npsurvSS is available for download on CRAN., (© 2019 The International Biometric Society.)

Multiple types of molecular (genetic, genomic, epigenetic, etc.) measurements, environmental risk factors, and their interactions have been found to contribute to the outcomes and phenotypes of complex diseases. In each of the previous studies, only the interactions between one type of molecular measurement and environmental risk factors have been analyzed. In recent biomedical studies, multidimensional profiling, in which data from multiple types of molecular measurements are collected from the same subjects, is becoming popular. A myriad of recent studies have shown that collectively analyzing multiple types of molecular measurements is not only biologically sensible but also leads to improved estimation and prediction. In this study, we conduct an M–E interaction analysis, with M standing for multidimensional molecular measurements and E standing for environmental risk factors. This can accommodate multiple types of molecular measurements and sufficiently account for their overlapping as well as independent information. Extensive simulation shows that it outperforms several closely related alternatives. In the analysis of TCGA (The Cancer Genome Atlas) data on lung adenocarcinoma and cutaneous melanoma, we make some stable biological findings and achieve stable prediction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Cox proportional hazards model, commonly used in clinical trials, assumes proportional hazards. However, it does not hold when, for example, there is a delayed onset of the treatment effect. In such a situation, an acute change in the hazard ratio function is expected to exist. This paper considers the Cox model with change-points and derives Akaike information criterion (AIC)-type information criteria for detecting those change-points. The change-point model does not allow for conventional statistical asymptotics due to its irregularity, thus a formal AIC that penalizes twice the number of parameters would not be analytically derived, and using it would clearly give overfitting analysis results. Therefore, we will construct specific asymptotics using the partial likelihood estimation method in the Cox model with change-points, and propose information criteria based on the original derivation method for AIC. If the partial likelihood is used in the estimation, information criteria with penalties much larger than twice the number of parameters could be obtained in an explicit form. Numerical experiments confirm that the proposed criteria are clearly superior in terms of the original purpose of AIC, which are to provide an estimate that is close to the true structure. We also apply the proposed criterion to actual clinical trial data to indicate that it will easily lead to different results from the formal AIC., (© 2023 The Authors. Biometrics published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of International Biometric Society.)

Restricted mean survival time (RMST) is a clinically interpretable and meaningful survival metric that has gained popularity in recent years. Several methods are available for regression modeling of RMST, most based on pseudo‐observations or what is essentially an inverse‐weighted complete‐case analysis. No existing RMST regression method allows for the covariate effects to be expressed as functions over time. This is a considerable limitation, in light of the many hazard regression methods that do accommodate such effects. To address this void in the literature, we propose RMST methods that permit estimating time‐varying effects. In particular, we propose an inference framework for directly modeling RMST as a continuous function of L. Large‐sample properties are derived. Simulation studies are performed to evaluate the performance of the methods in finite sample sizes. The proposed framework is applied to kidney transplant data obtained from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Comparing areas under the ROC curve (AUCs) is a popular approach to compare prognostic biomarkers. The aim of this paper is to present an efficient method to control the family‐wise error rate when multiple comparisons are performed. We suggest to combine the max‐t test and the closed testing procedures. We build on previous work on asymptotic results for ROC curves and on general multiple testing methods to efficiently take into account both the correlations between the test statistics and the logical constraints between the null hypotheses. The proposed method results in an uniformly more powerful procedure than both the single‐step max‐t test procedure and popular stepwise extensions of the Bonferroni procedure, such as Bonferroni–Holm. As demonstrated in this paper, the method can be applied in most usual contexts, including the time‐dependent context with right censored data. We show how the method works in practice through a motivating example where we compare several psychometric scores to predict the t‐year risk of Alzheimer's disease. The example illustrates several multiple testing settings and demonstrates the advantage of using the proposed methods over common alternatives. R code has been made available to facilitate the use of the methods by others. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Time is of the essence in evaluating potential drugs and biologics for the treatment and prevention of COVID‐19. There are currently 876 randomized clinical trials (phase 2 and 3) of treatments for COVID‐19 registered on clinicaltrials.gov. Covariate adjustment is a statistical analysis method with potential to improve precision and reduce the required sample size for a substantial number of these trials. Though covariate adjustment is recommended by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency, it is underutilized, especially for the types of outcomes (binary, ordinal, and time‐to‐event) that are common in COVID‐19 trials. To demonstrate the potential value added by covariate adjustment in this context, we simulated two‐arm, randomized trials comparing a hypothetical COVID‐19 treatment versus standard of care, where the primary outcome is binary, ordinal, or time‐to‐event. Our simulated distributions are derived from two sources: longitudinal data on over 500 patients hospitalized at Weill Cornell Medicine New York Presbyterian Hospital and a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention preliminary description of 2449 cases. In simulated trials with sample sizes ranging from 100 to 1000 participants, we found substantial precision gains from using covariate adjustment–equivalent to 4–18% reductions in the required sample size to achieve a desired power. This was the case for a variety of estimands (targets of inference). From these simulations, we conclude that covariate adjustment is a low‐risk, high‐reward approach to streamlining COVID‐19 treatment trials. We provide an R package and practical recommendations for implementation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Tree‐based methods are popular nonparametric tools in studying time‐to‐event outcomes. In this article, we introduce a novel framework for survival trees and ensembles, where the trees partition the dynamic survivor population and can handle time‐dependent covariates. Using the idea of randomized tests, we develop generalized time‐dependent receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves for evaluating the performance of survival trees. The tree‐building algorithm is guided by decision‐theoretic criteria based on ROC, targeting specifically for prediction accuracy. To address the instability issue of a single tree, we propose a novel ensemble procedure based on averaging martingale estimating equations, which is different from existing methods that average the predicted survival or cumulative hazard functions from individual trees. Extensive simulation studies are conducted to examine the performance of the proposed methods. We apply the methods to a study on AIDS for illustration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rejoinder: Improving precision and power in randomized trials for COVID-19 treatments using covariate adjustment, for binary, ordinal, and time-to-event outcomes An alternative estimator to consider for time-to-event outcomes is the augmented, inverse probability weighted estimator from Díaz I et al i . M. Zhang and B. Zhang describe a general approach for constructing covariate adjusted estimators that applies to many estimands. [Extracted from the article]

For the etiology, progression, and treatment of complex diseases, gene‐environment (G‐E) interactions have important implications beyond the main G and E effects. G‐E interaction analysis can be more challenging with higher dimensionality and need for accommodating the "main effects, interactions" hierarchy. In recent literature, an array of novel methods, many of which are based on the penalization technique, have been developed. In most of these studies, however, the structures of G measurements, for example, the adjacency structure of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs; attributable to their physical adjacency on the chromosomes) and the network structure of gene expressions (attributable to their coordinated biological functions and correlated measurements) have not been well accommodated. In this study, we develop structured G‐E interaction analysis, where such structures are accommodated using penalization for both the main G effects and interactions. Penalization is also applied for regularized estimation and selection. The proposed structured interaction analysis can be effectively realized. It is shown to have consistency properties under high‐dimensional settings. Simulations and analysis of GENEVA diabetes data with SNP measurements and TCGA melanoma data with gene expression measurements demonstrate its competitive practical performance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The conventional nonparametric tests in survival analysis, such as the log‐rank test, assess the null hypothesis that the hazards are equal at all times. However, hazards are hard to interpret causally, and other null hypotheses are more relevant in many scenarios with survival outcomes. To allow for a wider range of null hypotheses, we present a generic approach to define test statistics. This approach utilizes the fact that a wide range of common parameters in survival analysis can be expressed as solutions of differential equations. Thereby, we can test hypotheses based on survival parameters that solve differential equations driven by cumulative hazards, and it is easy to implement the tests on a computer. We present simulations, suggesting that our tests perform well for several hypotheses in a range of scenarios. As an illustration, we apply our tests to evaluate the effect of adjuvant chemotherapies in patients with colon cancer, using data from a randomized controlled trial. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

"Covariate adjustment" in the randomized trial context refers to an estimator of the average treatment effect that adjusts for chance imbalances between study arms in baseline variables (called "covariates"). The baseline variables could include, for example, age, sex, disease severity, and biomarkers. According to two surveys of clinical trial reports, there is confusion about the statistical properties of covariate adjustment. We focus on the analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) estimator, which involves fitting a linear model for the outcome given the treatment arm and baseline variables, and trials that use simple randomization with equal probability of assignment to treatment and control. We prove the following new (to the best of our knowledge) robustness property of ANCOVA to arbitrary model misspecification: Not only is the ANCOVA point estimate consistent (as proved by Yang and Tsiatis, 2001) but so is its standard error. This implies that confidence intervals and hypothesis tests conducted as if the linear model were correct are still asymptotically valid even when the linear model is arbitrarily misspecified, for example, when the baseline variables are nonlinearly related to the outcome or there is treatment effect heterogeneity. We also give a simple, robust formula for the variance reduction (equivalently, sample size reduction) from using ANCOVA. By reanalyzing completed randomized trials for mild cognitive impairment, schizophrenia, and depression, we demonstrate how ANCOVA can achieve variance reductions of 4 to 32%. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: In clinical studies with time‐to‐event outcomes, the restricted mean survival time (RMST) has attracted substantial attention as a summary measurement for its straightforward clinical interpretation. When the data are subject to length‐biased sampling, which is frequently encountered in observational cohort studies, existing methods to estimate the RMST are not applicable. In this article, we consider nonparametric and semiparametric regression methods to estimate the RMST under the setting of length‐biased sampling. To assess the covariate effects on the RMST, a semiparametric regression model that directly relates the covariates and the RMST is assumed. Based on the model, we develop unbiased estimating equations to obtain consistent estimators of covariate effects by properly adjusting for informative censoring and length bias. Stochastic process theories are used to establish the asymptotic properties of the proposed estimators. We investigate the finite sample performance through simulations and illustrate the methods by analyzing a prevalent cohort study of dementia in Canada. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: We propose a C‐index (index of concordance) applicable to recurrent event data. The present work addresses the dearth of measures for quantifying a regression model's ability to discriminate with respect to recurrent event risk. The data which motivated the methods arise from the Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (DOPPS), a long‐running prospective international study of end‐stage renal disease patients on hemodialysis. We derive the theoretical properties of the measure under the proportional rates model (Lin et al., 2000), and propose computationally convenient inference procedures based on perturbed influence functions. The methods are shown through simulations to perform well in moderate samples. Analysis of hospitalizations among a cohort of DOPPS patients reveals substantial improvement in discrimination upon adding country indicators to a model already containing basic clinical and demographic covariates, and further improvement upon adding a relatively large set of comorbidity indicators. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: Clinical practice may be enhanced by use of person‐level information that could guide treatment choice and lead to better outcomes for both treated individuals and for the population. The scientific challenge is to identify and validate those factors that can reliably be used to target treatment, and to accurately quantify the expected treatment benefit as a function of candidate markers. Our proposal is to explicitly focus on smooth non‐parametric evaluation of a canonical single index score that estimates the expected treatment benefit associated with patient characteristics. Our methods intentionally decouple the model used to generate the treatment benefit score from the methods that are adopted to evaluate the performance of the resulting single index score. We are motivated by the practical issue that model performance can not realistically be evaluated for every specific covariate value due to intrinsic sparseness. However, direct validation of a scalar treatment benefit score obtained through model‐based dimension reduction is feasible, and we believe should be the focus of validation efforts. We also show that the canonical single index treatment benefit score can be used for selecting subsets of patients with enriched expected treatment response since patients can be easily ordered and grouped based on the scalar score. Our biomedical motivation comes from a recent randomized trial of steroid injections for low back pain where baseline clinical and imaging data are candidate measures for guiding therapeutic choice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Studying multiple outcomes simultaneously allows researchers to begin to identify underlying factors that affect all of a set of diseases (i.e., shared etiology) and what may give rise to differences in disorders between patients (i.e., disease subtypes). In this work, our goal is to build risk scores that are predictive of multiple phenotypes simultaneously and identify subpopulations at high risk of multiple phenotypes. Such analyses could yield insight into etiology or point to treatment and prevention strategies. The standard canonical correlation analysis (CCA) can be used to relate multiple continuous outcomes to multiple predictors. However, in order to capture the full complexity of a disorder, phenotypes may include a diverse range of data types, including binary, continuous, ordinal, and censored variables. When phenotypes are diverse in this way, standard CCA is not possible and no methods currently exist to model them jointly. In the presence of such complications, we propose a semi-parametric CCA method to develop risk scores that are predictive of multiple phenotypes. To guard against potential model mis-specification, we also propose a nonparametric calibration method to identify subgroups that are at high risk of multiple disorders. A resampling procedure is also developed to account for the variability in these estimates. Our method opens the door to synthesizing a wide array of data sources for the purposes of joint prediction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Statistical analyses that investigate risk factors for Alzheimer's disease (AD) are often subject to a number of challenges. Some of these challenges arise due to practical considerations regarding data collection such that the observation of AD events is subject to complex censoring including left-truncation and either interval or right-censoring. Additional challenges arise due to the fact that study participants under investigation are often subject to competing forces, most notably death, that may not be independent of AD. Towards resolving the latter, researchers may choose to embed the study of AD within the 'semi-competing risks' framework for which the recent statistical literature has seen a number of advances including for the so-called illness-death model. To the best of our knowledge, however, the semi-competing risks literature has not fully considered analyses in contexts with complex censoring, as in studies of AD. This is particularly the case when interest lies with the accelerated failure time (AFT) model, an alternative to the traditional multiplicative Cox model that places emphasis away from the hazard function. In this article, we outline a new Bayesian framework for estimation/inference of an AFT illness-death model for semi-competing risks data subject to complex censoring. An efficient computational algorithm that gives researchers the flexibility to adopt either a fully parametric or a semi-parametric model specification is developed and implemented. The proposed methods are motivated by and illustrated with an analysis of data from the Adult Changes in Thought study, an on-going community-based prospective study of incident AD in western Washington State. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Reliable and accurate risk prediction is fundamental for successful management of clinical conditions. Estimating comprehensive risk prediction models precisely, however, is a difficult task, especially when the outcome of interest is time to a rare event and the number of candidate predictors, p, is not very small. Another challenge in developing accurate risk models arises from potential model misspecification. Time-specific generalized linear models estimated with inverse censoring probability weighting are robust to model misspecification, but may be inefficient in the rare event setting. To improve the efficiency of such robust estimation procedures, various augmentation methods have been proposed in the literature. These procedures can also leverage auxiliary variables such as intermediate outcomes that are predictive of event risk. However, most existing methods do not perform well in the rare event setting, especially when p is not small. In this article, we propose a two-step, imputation-based augmentation procedure that can improve estimation efficiency and that is robust to model misspecification. We also develop regularized augmentation procedures for settings where p is not small, along with procedures to improve the estimation of individualized treatment effect in risk reduction. Numerical studies suggest that our proposed methods substantially outperform existing methods in efficiency gains. The proposed methods are applied to an AIDS clinical trial for treating HIV-infected patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Prognostic survival models are commonly evaluated in terms of both their calibration and their discrimination. Comparing observed and predicted survival curves can assess calibration, while discrimination is typically summarized through comparison of the properties of cases or subjects who experience an event, and the properties of controls represented by event-free individuals. For binary data, discrimination is characterized either by using the relative ranks of cases and controls and a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, or by summarizing the magnitude of risk placed on cases and controls through calculation of the discrimination slope (DS). In this article, we propose a risk-based measure of time-varying discrimination that generalizes the discrimination slope to allow use with incident events and hazard models. We refer to the new measure as the hazard discrimination summary (HDS) since it compares the relative risk among incident cases to their associated dynamic risk set controls. We introduce both a model-based estimation procedure that adopts the Cox model, and an alternative approach that locally relaxes the proportional hazards assumption. We illustrate the proposed methods using both a benchmark survival data set, and an oncology study where primary interest is in the time-varying performance of candidate biomarkers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Long-term follow-up is common in many medical investigations where the interest lies in predicting patients' risks for a future adverse outcome using repeatedly measured predictors over time. A key quantity is the likelihood of developing an adverse outcome among individuals who survived up to time s given their covariate information up to time s. Simple, yet reliable, methodology for updating the predicted risk of disease progression using longitudinal markers remains elusive. Two main approaches have been considered in the literature. One approach, based on joint modeling (JM) of failure time and longitudinal covariate process (Tsiatis and Davidian, 2004), derives such longitudinal predictive probability from the joint probability of a longitudinal marker and an event at a given time. A second approach, the partly conditional (PC) modeling (Zheng and Heagerty, 2005), directly models the predictive probability conditional on survival up to a landmark time and information accrued by that time. In this article, we propose new PC models for longitudinal prediction that are more flexible than joint modeling and improve the prediction accuracy over existing PC models. We provide procedures for making inference regarding future risk for an individual with longitudinal measures up to a given time. In addition, we conduct simulations to evaluate both JM and PC approaches in order to provide practical guidance on modeling choices. We use standard measures of predictive accuracy adapted to our setting to explore the predictiveness of the two approaches. We illustrate the performance of the two approaches on a dataset from the End Stage Renal Disease Study (ESRDS). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Considerable interest has recently been focused on studying multiple phenotypes simultaneously in both epidemiological and genomic studies, either to capture the multidimensionality of complex disorders or to understand shared etiology of related disorders. We seek to identify multiple regulators or predictors that are associated with multiple outcomes when these outcomes may be measured on very different scales or composed of a mixture of continuous, binary, and not-fully observed elements. We first propose an estimation technique to put all effects on similar scales, and we induce sparsity on the estimated effects. We provide standard asymptotic results for this estimator and show that resampling can be used to quantify uncertainty in finite samples. We finally provide a multiple testing procedure which can be geared specifically to the types of multiple regulators of interest, and we establish that, under standard regularity conditions, the familywise error rate will approach 0 as sample size diverges. Simulation results indicate that our approach can improve over unregularized methods both in reducing bias in estimation and improving power for testing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Identification of novel biomarkers for risk prediction is important for disease prevention and optimal treatment selection. However, studies aiming to discover which biomarkers are useful for risk prediction often require the use of stored biological samples from large assembled cohorts, and thus the depletion of a finite and precious resource. To make efficient use of such stored samples, two-phase sampling designs are often adopted as resource-efficient sampling strategies, especially when the outcome of interest is rare. Existing methods for analyzing data from two-phase studies focus primarily on single marker analysis or fitting the Cox regression model to combine information from multiple markers. However, the Cox model may not fit the data well. Under model misspecification, the composite score derived from the Cox model may not perform well in predicting the outcome. Under a general two-phase stratified cohort sampling design, we present a novel approach to combining multiple markers to optimize prediction by fitting a flexible nonparametric transformation model. Using inverse probability weighting to account for the outcome-dependent sampling, we propose to estimate the model parameters by maximizing an objective function which can be interpreted as a weighted C-statistic for survival outcomes. Regardless of model adequacy, the proposed procedure yields a sensible composite risk score for prediction. A major obstacle for making inference under two phase studies is due to the correlation induced by the finite population sampling, which prevents standard inference procedures such as the bootstrap from being used for variance estimation. We propose a resampling procedure to derive valid confidence intervals for the model parameters and the C-statistic accuracy measure. We illustrate the new methods with simulation studies and an analysis of a two-phase study of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) subtypes for predicting the risk of coronary heart disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Most statistical tests for treatment effects used in randomized clinical trials with survival outcomes are based on the proportional hazards assumption, which often fails in practice. Data from early exploratory studies may provide evidence of nonproportional hazards, which can guide the choice of alternative tests in the design of practice-changing confirmatory trials. We developed a test to detect treatment effects in a late-stage trial, which accounts for the deviations from proportional hazards suggested by early-stage data. Conditional on early-stage data, among all tests that control the frequentist Type I error rate at a fixed α level, our testing procedure maximizes the Bayesian predictive probability that the study will demonstrate the efficacy of the experimental treatment. Hence, the proposed test provides a useful benchmark for other tests commonly used in the presence of nonproportional hazards, for example, weighted log-rank tests. We illustrate this approach in simulations based on data from a published cancer immunotherapy phase III trial., (© 2020 The International Biometric Society.)

To evaluate a new therapy versus a control via a randomized, comparative clinical study or a series of trials, due to heterogeneity of the study patient population, a pre-specified, predictive enrichment procedure may be implemented to identify an 'enrichable' subpopulation. For patients in this subpopulation, the therapy is expected to have a desirable overall risk-benefit profile. To develop and validate such a 'therapy-diagnostic co-development' strategy, a three-step procedure may be conducted with three independent data sets from a series of similar studies or a single trial. At the first stage, we create various candidate scoring systems based on the baseline information of the patients via, for example, parametric models using the first data set. Each individual score reflects an anticipated average treatment difference for future patients who share similar baseline profiles. A large score indicates that these patients tend to benefit from the new therapy. At the second step, a potentially promising, enrichable subgroup is identified using the totality of evidence from these scoring systems. At the final stage, we validate such a selection via two-sample inference procedures for assessing the treatment effectiveness statistically and clinically with the third data set, the so-called holdout sample. When the study size is not large, one may combine the first two steps using a 'cross-training-evaluation' process. Comprehensive numerical studies are conducted to investigate the operational characteristics of the proposed method. The entire enrichment procedure is illustrated with the data from a cardiovascular trial to evaluate a beta-blocker versus a placebo for treating chronic heart failure patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Prediction models for disease risk and prognosis play an important role in biomedical research, and evaluating their predictive accuracy in the presence of censored data is of substantial interest. The standard concordance ( c) statistic has been extended to provide a summary measure of predictive accuracy for survival models. Motivated by a prostate cancer study, we address several issues associated with evaluating survival prediction models based on [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The discriminatory ability of a marker for censored survival data is routinely assessed by the time-dependent ROC curve and the c-index. The time-dependent ROC curve evaluates the ability of a biomarker to predict whether a patient lives past a particular time t. The c-index measures the global concordance of the marker and the survival time regardless of the time point. We propose a Bayesian semiparametric approach to estimate these two measures. The proposed estimators are based on the conditional distribution of the survival time given the biomarker and the empirical biomarker distribution. The conditional distribution is estimated by a linear-dependent Dirichlet process mixture model. The resulting ROC curve is smooth as it is estimated by a mixture of parametric functions. The proposed c-index estimator is shown to be more efficient than the commonly used Harrell's c-index since it uses all pairs of data rather than only informative pairs. The proposed estimators are evaluated through simulations and illustrated using a lung cancer dataset. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is agreed among biostatisticians that prediction models for binary outcomes should satisfy two essential criteria: first, a prediction model should have a high discriminatory power, implying that it is able to clearly separate cases from controls. Second, the model should be well calibrated, meaning that the predicted risks should closely agree with the relative frequencies observed in the data. The focus of this work is on the predictiveness curve, which has been proposed by Huang et al. (Biometrics 63, 2007) as a graphical tool to assess the aforementioned criteria. By conducting a detailed analysis of its properties, we review the role of the predictiveness curve in the performance assessment of biomedical prediction models. In particular, we demonstrate that marker comparisons should not be based solely on the predictiveness curve, as it is not possible to consistently visualize the added predictive value of a new marker by comparing the predictiveness curves obtained from competing models. Based on our analysis, we propose the 'residual-based predictiveness curve' (RBP curve), which addresses the aforementioned issue and which extends the original method to settings where the evaluation of a prediction model on independent test data is of particular interest. Similar to the predictiveness curve, the RBP curve reflects both the calibration and the discriminatory power of a prediction model. In addition, the curve can be conveniently used to conduct valid performance checks and marker comparisons. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Accurate risk prediction models are needed to identify different risk groups for individualized prevention and treatment strategies. In the Nurses' Health Study, to examine the effects of several biomarkers and genetic markers on the risk of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), a three-phase nested case-control (NCC) design was conducted, in which two sequential NCC subcohorts were formed with one nested within the other, and one set of new markers measured on each of the subcohorts. One objective of the study is to evaluate clinical values of novel biomarkers in improving upon existing risk models because of potential cost associated with assaying biomarkers. In this paper, we develop robust statistical procedures for constructing risk prediction models for RA and estimating the incremental value (IncV) of new markers based on three-phase NCC studies. Our method also takes into account possible time-varying effects of biomarkers in risk modeling, which allows us to more robustly assess the biomarker utility and address the question of whether a marker is better suited for short-term or long-term risk prediction. The proposed procedures are shown to perform well in finite samples via simulation studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Variable screening has emerged as a crucial first step in the analysis of high-throughput data, but existing procedures can be computationally cumbersome, difficult to justify theoretically, or inapplicable to certain types of analyses. Motivated by a high-dimensional censored quantile regression problem in multiple myeloma genomics, this article makes three contributions. First, we establish a score test-based screening framework, which is widely applicable, extremely computationally efficient, and relatively simple to justify. Secondly, we propose a resampling-based procedure for selecting the number of variables to retain after screening according to the principle of reproducibility. Finally, we propose a new iterative score test screening method which is closely related to sparse regression. In simulations we apply our methods to four different regression models and show that they can outperform existing procedures. We also apply score test screening to an analysis of gene expression data from multiple myeloma patients using a censored quantile regression model to identify high-risk genes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Integrating genomic information with traditional clinical risk factors to improve the prediction of disease outcomes could profoundly change the practice of medicine. However, the large number of potential markers and possible complexity of the relationship between markers and disease make it difficult to construct accurate risk prediction models. Standard approaches for identifying important markers often rely on marginal associations or linearity assumptions and may not capture non-linear or interactive effects. In recent years, much work has been done to group genes into pathways and networks. Integrating such biological knowledge into statistical learning could potentially improve model interpretability and reliability. One effective approach is to employ a kernel machine (KM) framework, which can capture nonlinear effects if nonlinear kernels are used (Scholkopf and Smola, 2002; Liu et al., 2007, 2008). For survival outcomes, KM regression modeling and testing procedures have been derived under a proportional hazards (PH) assumption (Li and Luan, 2003; Cai, Tonini, and Lin, 2011). In this article, we derive testing and prediction methods for KM regression under the accelerated failure time (AFT) model, a useful alternative to the PH model. We approximate the null distribution of our test statistic using resampling procedures. When multiple kernels are of potential interest, it may be unclear in advance which kernel to use for testing and estimation. We propose a robust Omnibus Test that combines information across kernels, and an approach for selecting the best kernel for estimation. The methods are illustrated with an application in breast cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In a longitudinal study, suppose that the primary endpoint is the time to a specific event. This response variable, however, may be censored by an independent censoring variable or by the occurrence of one of several dependent competing events. For each study subject, a set of baseline covariates is collected. The question is how to construct a reliable prediction rule for the future subject's profile of all competing risks of interest at a specific time point for risk-benefit decision making. In this article, we propose a two-stage procedure to make inferences about such subject-specific profiles. For the first step, we use a parametric model to obtain a univariate risk index score system. We then estimate consistently the average competing risks for subjects who have the same parametric index score via a nonparametric function estimation procedure. We illustrate this new proposal with the data from a randomized clinical trial for evaluating the efficacy of a treatment for prostate cancer. The primary endpoint for this study was the time to prostate cancer death, but had two types of dependent competing events, one from cardiovascular death and the other from death of other causes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recently meta-analysis has been widely utilized to combine information across multiple studies to evaluate a common effect. Integrating data from similar studies is particularly useful in genomic studies where the individual study sample sizes are not large relative to the number of parameters of interest. In this article, we are interested in developing robust prognostic rules for the prediction of -year survival based on multiple studies. We propose to construct a composite score for prediction by fitting a stratified semiparametric transformation model that allows the studies to have related but not identical outcomes. To evaluate the accuracy of the resulting score, we provide point and interval estimators for the commonly used accuracy measures including the time-specific receiver operating characteristic curves, and positive and negative predictive values. We apply the proposed procedures to develop prognostic rules for the 5-year survival of breast cancer patients based on five breast cancer genomic studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In clinical applications, the prediction error of survival models has to be taken into consideration to assess the practical suitability of conclusions drawn from these models. Different approaches to evaluate the predictive performance of survival models have been suggested in the literature. In this article, we analyze the properties of the estimator of prediction error developed by , Biometrics 56, 249-255), which quantifies the absolute distance between predicted and observed survival functions. We provide a formal proof that the estimator proposed by Schemper and Henderson is not robust against misspecification of the survival model, that is, the estimator will only be meaningful if the model family used for deriving predictions has been specified correctly. To remedy this problem, we construct a new estimator of the absolute distance between predicted and observed survival functions. We show that this modified Schemper-Henderson estimator is robust against model misspecification, allowing its practical application to a wide class of survival models. The properties of the Schemper-Henderson estimator and its new modification are illustrated by means of a simulation study and the analysis of two clinical data sets. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Clinicians are often interested in the effect of covariates on survival probabilities at prespecified study times. Because different factors can be associated with the risk of short- and long-term failure, a flexible modeling strategy is pursued. Given a set of multiple candidate working models, an objective methodology is proposed that aims to construct consistent and asymptotically normal estimators of regression coefficients and average prediction error for each working model, that are free from the nuisance censoring variable. It requires the conditional distribution of censoring given covariates to be modeled. The model selection strategy uses stepup or stepdown multiple hypothesis testing procedures that control either the proportion of false positives or generalized familywise error rate when comparing models based on estimates of average prediction error. The context can actually be cast as a missing data problem, where augmented inverse probability weighted complete case estimators of regression coefficients and prediction error can be used ( Tsiatis, 2006 , Semiparametric Theory and Missing Data). A simulation study and an interesting analysis of a recent AIDS trial are provided. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]