4.2 Article

Counterfactual mediation analysis in the multistate model framework for surrogate and clinical time-to-event outcomes in randomized controlled trials

期刊

PHARMACEUTICAL STATISTICS
卷 21, 期 1, 页码 163-175

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/pst.2159

关键词

analysis; mediation analysis; progression-free survival; randomized controlled trials as topic; surrogate endpoint; survival

资金

  1. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases [UM1-AI068634]
  2. National Institute of General Medical Sciences [T32 GM074905]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study introduces a counterfactual-based mediation analysis method for causal assessment of surrogate endpoints in cancer randomized controlled trials. Using a multistate model for risk prediction, it considers both direct and indirect transitions, defining natural direct and indirect effects. The approach is illustrated through a case study on the use of metastasis as a surrogate outcome for prostate cancer-specific mortality in a randomized trial of radical prostatectomy.
In cancer randomized controlled trials, surrogate endpoints are frequently time-to-event endpoints, subject to the competing risk from the time-to-event clinical outcome. In this context, we introduce a counterfactual-based mediation analysis for a causal assessment of surrogacy. We use a multistate model for risk prediction to account for both direct transitions towards the clinical outcome and indirect transitions through the surrogate outcome. Within the counterfactual framework, we define natural direct and indirect effects with a causal interpretation. Based on these measures, we define the proportion of the treatment effect on the clinical outcome mediated by the surrogate outcome. We estimate the proportion for both the cumulative risk and restricted mean time lost. We illustrate our approach by using 18-year follow-up data from the SPCG-4 randomized trial of radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. We assess time to metastasis as a surrogate outcome for prostate cancer-specific mortality.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据