IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/biomet/v77y2021i2p477-489.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation of longitudinal surrogate markers

Author

Listed:
  • Denis Agniel
  • Layla Parast

Abstract

The use of surrogate markers to examine the effectiveness of a treatment has the potential to decrease study length and identify effective treatments more quickly. Most available methods to investigate the usefulness of a surrogate marker involve restrictive parametric assumptions and tend to focus on settings where the surrogate is measured at a single point in time. However, in many clinical settings, the potential surrogate marker is often measured repeatedly over time, and thus, the surrogate marker information is a trajectory of measurements. In addition, it is often difficult in practice to correctly specify the relationship between a treatment, primary outcome, and surrogate marker trajectory. In this paper, we propose a model‐free definition for the proportion of the treatment effect on the primary outcome that is explained by the treatment effect on the longitudinal surrogate markers. We propose three novel flexible methods to estimate this proportion, develop the asymptotic properties of our estimators, and investigate the robustness of the estimators under multiple settings via a simulation study. We apply our proposed procedures to an AIDS clinical trial dataset to examine a trajectory of CD4 counts as a potential surrogate.

Suggested Citation

  • Denis Agniel & Layla Parast, 2021. "Evaluation of longitudinal surrogate markers," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 77(2), pages 477-489, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:biomet:v:77:y:2021:i:2:p:477-489
    DOI: 10.1111/biom.13310
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/biom.13310
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/biom.13310?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Philip T. Reiss & Jeff Goldsmith & Han Lin Shang & R. Todd Ogden, 2017. "Methods for Scalar-on-Function Regression," International Statistical Review, International Statistical Institute, vol. 85(2), pages 228-249, August.
    2. Müller, Hans-Georg & Yao, Fang, 2008. "Functional Additive Models," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 103(484), pages 1534-1544.
    3. Pryseley, Assam & Tilahun, Abel & Alonso, Ariel & Molenberghs, Geert, 2010. "Using earlier measures in a longitudinal sequence as a potential surrogate for a later one," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 54(5), pages 1342-1354, May.
    4. Simon N. Wood, 2003. "Thin plate regression splines," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 65(1), pages 95-114, February.
    5. Didier Renard & Helena Geys & Geert Molenberghs & Tomasz Burzykowski & Marc Buyse & Tony Vangeneugden & Luc Bijnens, 2003. "Validation of a longitudinally measured surrogate marker for a time-to-event endpoint," Journal of Applied Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(2), pages 235-247.
    6. Luo Xiao, 2019. "Asymptotics of bivariate penalised splines," Journal of Nonparametric Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(2), pages 289-314, April.
    7. Marshall M. Joffe & Tom Greene, 2009. "Related Causal Frameworks for Surrogate Outcomes," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 65(2), pages 530-538, June.
    8. Jeremy M. G. Taylor & Yue Wang & Rodolphe Thiébaut, 2005. "Counterfactual Links to the Proportion of Treatment Effect Explained by a Surrogate Marker," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 61(4), pages 1102-1111, December.
    9. Peter B. Gilbert & Michael G. Hudgens, 2008. "Evaluating Candidate Principal Surrogate Endpoints," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 64(4), pages 1146-1154, December.
    10. Tyler J. VanderWeele, 2013. "Surrogate Measures and Consistent Surrogates," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 69(3), pages 561-565, September.
    11. Yao, Fang & Muller, Hans-Georg & Wang, Jane-Ling, 2005. "Functional Data Analysis for Sparse Longitudinal Data," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 100, pages 577-590, June.
    12. James, Gareth M. & Silverman, Bernard W., 2005. "Functional Adaptive Model Estimation," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 100, pages 565-576, June.
    13. Yue Wang & Jeremy M. G. Taylor, 2002. "A Measure of the Proportion of Treatment Effect Explained by a Surrogate Marker," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 58(4), pages 803-812, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Emily K. Roberts & Michael R. Elliott & Jeremy M. G. Taylor, 2023. "Solutions for surrogacy validation with longitudinal outcomes for a gene therapy," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 79(3), pages 1840-1852, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Layla Parast & Tianxi Cai & Lu Tian, 2023. "Testing for heterogeneity in the utility of a surrogate marker," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 79(2), pages 799-810, June.
    2. Gilbert Peter B. & Huang Ying & Gabriel Erin E. & Chan Ivan S.F., 2015. "Surrogate Endpoint Evaluation: Principal Stratification Criteria and the Prentice Definition," Journal of Causal Inference, De Gruyter, vol. 3(2), pages 157-175, September.
    3. Layla Parast & Tanya P. Garcia & Ross L. Prentice & Raymond J. Carroll, 2022. "Robust methods to correct for measurement error when evaluating a surrogate marker," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 78(1), pages 9-23, March.
    4. Ghosh, Debashis, 2012. "A causal framework for surrogate endpoints with semi-competing risks data," Statistics & Probability Letters, Elsevier, vol. 82(11), pages 1898-1902.
    5. Emily K. Roberts & Michael R. Elliott & Jeremy M. G. Taylor, 2023. "Solutions for surrogacy validation with longitudinal outcomes for a gene therapy," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 79(3), pages 1840-1852, September.
    6. Zhichao Jiang & Peng Ding & Zhi Geng, 2016. "Principal causal effect identification and surrogate end point evaluation by multiple trials," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 78(4), pages 829-848, September.
    7. Xuan Wang & Layla Parast & Larry Han & Lu Tian & Tianxi Cai, 2023. "Robust approach to combining multiple markers to improve surrogacy," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 79(2), pages 788-798, June.
    8. Ying Huang & Shibasish Dasgupta, 2019. "Likelihood-Based Methods for Assessing Principal Surrogate Endpoints in Vaccine Trials," Statistics in Biosciences, Springer;International Chinese Statistical Association, vol. 11(3), pages 504-523, December.
    9. Huang, Lele & Zhao, Junlong & Wang, Huiwen & Wang, Siyang, 2016. "Robust shrinkage estimation and selection for functional multiple linear model through LAD loss," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 384-400.
    10. Boente, Graciela & Parada, Daniela, 2023. "Robust estimation for functional quadratic regression models," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    11. Cheng Zheng & Lei Liu, 2022. "Quantifying direct and indirect effect for longitudinal mediator and survival outcome using joint modeling approach," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 78(3), pages 1233-1243, September.
    12. Gilbert Peter B. & Blette Bryan S. & Hudgens Michael G. & Shepherd Bryan E., 2020. "Post-randomization Biomarker Effect Modification Analysis in an HIV Vaccine Clinical Trial," Journal of Causal Inference, De Gruyter, vol. 8(1), pages 54-69, January.
    13. Ciarleglio, Adam & Todd Ogden, R., 2016. "Wavelet-based scalar-on-function finite mixture regression models," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 86-96.
    14. Israel Martínez‐Hernández & Marc G. Genton, 2021. "Nonparametric trend estimation in functional time series with application to annual mortality rates," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 77(3), pages 866-878, September.
    15. Wang, Guochang & Lin, Nan & Zhang, Baoxue, 2013. "Functional contour regression," Journal of Multivariate Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 1-13.
    16. Tang, Qingguo & Tu, Wei & Kong, Linglong, 2023. "Estimation for partial functional partially linear additive model," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    17. Tingting Huang & Gilbert Saporta & Huiwen Wang & Shanshan Wang, 2021. "A robust spatial autoregressive scalar-on-function regression with t-distribution," Advances in Data Analysis and Classification, Springer;German Classification Society - Gesellschaft für Klassifikation (GfKl);Japanese Classification Society (JCS);Classification and Data Analysis Group of the Italian Statistical Society (CLADAG);International Federation of Classification Societies (IFCS), vol. 15(1), pages 57-81, March.
    18. Shuang Wu & Hans-Georg Müller, 2011. "Response-Adaptive Regression for Longitudinal Data," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 67(3), pages 852-860, September.
    19. Shang, Han Lin, 2013. "Bayesian bandwidth estimation for a nonparametric functional regression model with unknown error density," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 185-198.
    20. Manuel Febrero-Bande & Wenceslao González-Manteiga, 2013. "Generalized additive models for functional data," TEST: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 22(2), pages 278-292, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:biomet:v:77:y:2021:i:2:p:477-489. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0006-341X .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.