IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/stapro/v82y2012i11p1898-1902.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A causal framework for surrogate endpoints with semi-competing risks data

Author

Listed:
  • Ghosh, Debashis

Abstract

In this note, we address the problem of surrogacy using a causal modelling framework that differs substantially from the potential outcomes model that pervades the biostatistical literature. The framework comes from econometrics, and it conceptualizes direct effects of the surrogate endpoint on the true endpoint. While this framework can incorporate the so-called semi-competing risks data structure, we also derive a fundamental non-identifiability result. Relationships to existing causal modelling frameworks are also discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Ghosh, Debashis, 2012. "A causal framework for surrogate endpoints with semi-competing risks data," Statistics & Probability Letters, Elsevier, vol. 82(11), pages 1898-1902.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:stapro:v:82:y:2012:i:11:p:1898-1902
    DOI: 10.1016/j.spl.2012.06.010
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167715212002210
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.spl.2012.06.010?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Peter B. Gilbert & Michael G. Hudgens, 2008. "Evaluating Candidate Principal Surrogate Endpoints," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 64(4), pages 1146-1154, December.
    2. Yun Li & Jeremy M.G. Taylor & Michael R. Elliott, 2010. "A Bayesian Approach to Surrogacy Assessment Using Principal Stratification in Clinical Trials," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 66(2), pages 523-531, June.
    3. Jaap H. Abbring & Gerard J. van den Berg, 2003. "The Nonparametric Identification of Treatment Effects in Duration Models," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 71(5), pages 1491-1517, September.
    4. Debashis Ghosh, 2009. "On Assessing Surrogacy in a Single Trial Setting Using a Semicompeting Risks Paradigm," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 65(2), pages 521-529, June.
    5. Marshall M. Joffe & Tom Greene, 2009. "Related Causal Frameworks for Surrogate Outcomes," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 65(2), pages 530-538, June.
    6. 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.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Ariel Alonso & Wim Van der Elst & Geert Molenberghs & Marc Buyse & Tomasz Burzykowski, 2015. "On the relationship between the causal-inference and meta-analytic paradigms for the validation of surrogate endpoints," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 71(1), pages 15-24, March.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. Ying Huang & Peter B. Gilbert & Julian Wolfson, 2013. "Design and Estimation for Evaluating Principal Surrogate Markers in Vaccine Trials," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 69(2), pages 301-309, June.
    5. Denis Agniel & Layla Parast, 2021. "Evaluation of longitudinal surrogate markers," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 77(2), pages 477-489, June.
    6. Ying Huang & Peter B. Gilbert, 2011. "Comparing Biomarkers as Principal Surrogate Endpoints," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 67(4), pages 1442-1451, December.
    7. Michael R. Elliott & Anna Conlon & Yun Li, 2013. "Discussion on “Surrogate Measures and Consistent Surrogates”," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 69(3), pages 565-569, September.
    8. VanderWeele Tyler J, 2011. "Principal Stratification -- Uses and Limitations," The International Journal of Biostatistics, De Gruyter, vol. 7(1), pages 1-14, July.
    9. Debashis Ghosh & Jeremy M. G. Taylor & Daniel J. Sargent, 2012. "Rejoinder for “Meta-analysis for Surrogacy: Accelerated Failure Time Models and Semicompeting Risks Modeling”," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 68(1), pages 245-247, March.
    10. Gilbert Peter B. & Hudgens Michael G. & Wolfson Julian, 2011. "Commentary on "Principal Stratification -- a Goal or a Tool?" by Judea Pearl," The International Journal of Biostatistics, De Gruyter, vol. 7(1), pages 1-15, September.
    11. Zhichao Jiang & Shu Yang & Peng Ding, 2022. "Multiply robust estimation of causal effects under principal ignorability," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 84(4), pages 1423-1445, September.
    12. Julian Wolfson & Peter Gilbert, 2010. "Statistical Identifiability and the Surrogate Endpoint Problem, with Application to Vaccine Trials," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 66(4), pages 1153-1161, December.
    13. Ying Huang, 2018. "Evaluating principal surrogate markers in vaccine trials in the presence of multiphase sampling," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 74(1), pages 27-39, March.
    14. 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.
    15. Layla Parast & Lu Tian & Tianxi Cai, 2020. "Assessing the value of a censored surrogate outcome," Lifetime Data Analysis: An International Journal Devoted to Statistical Methods and Applications for Time-to-Event Data, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 245-265, April.
    16. 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.
    17. 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.
    18. Corwin M. Zigler & Thomas R. Belin, 2012. "A Bayesian Approach to Improved Estimation of Causal Effect Predictiveness for a Principal Surrogate Endpoint," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 68(3), pages 922-932, September.
    19. Tyler J. VanderWeele, 2013. "Surrogate Measures and Consistent Surrogates," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 69(3), pages 561-565, September.
    20. Tyler J. VanderWeele, 2013. "Rejoinder," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 69(3), pages 577-581, September.

    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:eee:stapro:v:82:y:2012:i:11:p:1898-1902. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/622892/description#description .

    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.