IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/biomet/v74y2018i1p18-26.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Incorporating Patient Preferences into Estimation of Optimal Individualized Treatment Rules

Author

Listed:
  • Emily L. Butler
  • Eric B. Laber
  • Sonia M. Davis
  • Michael R. Kosorok

Abstract

Precision medicine seeks to provide treatment only if, when, to whom, and at the dose it is needed. Thus, precision medicine is a vehicle by which healthcare can be made both more effective and efficient. Individualized treatment rules operationalize precision medicine as a map from current patient information to a recommended treatment. An optimal individualized treatment rule is defined as maximizing the mean of a pre†specified scalar outcome. However, in settings with multiple outcomes, choosing a scalar composite outcome by which to define optimality is difficult. Furthermore, when there is heterogeneity across patient preferences for these outcomes, it may not be possible to construct a single composite outcome that leads to high†quality treatment recommendations for all patients. We simultaneously estimate the optimal individualized treatment rule for all composite outcomes representable as a convex combination of the (suitably transformed) outcomes. For each patient, we use a preference elicitation questionnaire and item response theory to derive the posterior distribution over preferences for these composite outcomes and subsequently derive an estimator of an optimal individualized treatment rule tailored to patient preferences. We prove that as the number of subjects and items on the questionnaire diverge, our estimator is consistent for an oracle optimal individualized treatment rule wherein each patient's preference is known a priori. We illustrate the proposed method using data from a clinical trial on antipsychotic medications for schizophrenia.

Suggested Citation

  • Emily L. Butler & Eric B. Laber & Sonia M. Davis & Michael R. Kosorok, 2018. "Incorporating Patient Preferences into Estimation of Optimal Individualized Treatment Rules," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 74(1), pages 18-26, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:biomet:v:74:y:2018:i:1:p:18-26
    DOI: 10.1111/biom.12743
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/biom.12743
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/biom.12743?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. Yingqi Zhao & Donglin Zeng & A. John Rush & Michael R. Kosorok, 2012. "Estimating Individualized Treatment Rules Using Outcome Weighted Learning," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 107(499), pages 1106-1118, September.
    2. Frank, Richard G. & Zeckhauser, Richard J., 2007. "Custom-made versus ready-to-wear treatments: Behavioral propensities in physicians' choices," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(6), pages 1101-1127, December.
    3. Baqun Zhang & Anastasios A. Tsiatis & Eric B. Laber & Marie Davidian, 2012. "A Robust Method for Estimating Optimal Treatment Regimes," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 68(4), pages 1010-1018, December.
    4. Y. Q. Zhao & D. Zeng & E. B. Laber & R. Song & M. Yuan & M. R. Kosorok, 2015. "Doubly robust learning for estimating individualized treatment with censored data," Biometrika, Biometrika Trust, vol. 102(1), pages 151-168.
    5. E. B. Laber & Y. Q. Zhao, 2015. "Tree-based methods for individualized treatment regimes," Biometrika, Biometrika Trust, vol. 102(3), pages 501-514.
    6. Yufan Zhao & Donglin Zeng & Mark A. Socinski & Michael R. Kosorok, 2011. "Reinforcement Learning Strategies for Clinical Trials in Nonsmall Cell Lung Cancer," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 67(4), pages 1422-1433, December.
    7. Robin Henderson & Phil Ansell & Deyadeen Alshibani, 2010. "Regret-Regression for Optimal Dynamic Treatment Regimes," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 66(4), pages 1192-1201, December.
    8. Richter, Marcel K. & Wong, K.-C.Kam-Chau, 2004. "Concave utility on finite sets," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 115(2), pages 341-357, April.
    9. Baqun Zhang & Anastasios A. Tsiatis & Eric B. Laber & Marie Davidian, 2013. "Robust estimation of optimal dynamic treatment regimes for sequential treatment decisions," Biometrika, Biometrika Trust, vol. 100(3), pages 681-694.
    10. Dominic Hodgkin & Joanna Volpe‐Vartanian & Elizabeth L. Merrick & Constance M. Horgan & Andrew A. Nierenberg & Richard G. Frank & Sue Lee, 2012. "Customization in prescribing for bipolar disorder," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(6), pages 653-668, June.
    11. Eric B. Laber & Daniel J. Lizotte & Bradley Ferguson, 2014. "Set-valued dynamic treatment regimes for competing outcomes," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 70(1), pages 53-61, March.
    12. Susan M. Shortreed & Erica E. M. Moodie, 2012. "Estimating the optimal dynamic antipsychotic treatment regime: evidence from the sequential multiple-assignment randomized Clinical Antipsychotic Trials of Intervention and Effectiveness schizophrenia," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 61(4), pages 577-599, August.
    13. Orellana Liliana & Rotnitzky Andrea & Robins James M., 2010. "Dynamic Regime Marginal Structural Mean Models for Estimation of Optimal Dynamic Treatment Regimes, Part II: Proofs of Results," The International Journal of Biostatistics, De Gruyter, vol. 6(2), pages 1-19, March.
    14. Orellana Liliana & Rotnitzky Andrea & Robins James M., 2010. "Dynamic Regime Marginal Structural Mean Models for Estimation of Optimal Dynamic Treatment Regimes, Part I: Main Content," The International Journal of Biostatistics, De Gruyter, vol. 6(2), pages 1-49, March.
    15. Lu Tian & Ash A. Alizadeh & Andrew J. Gentles & Robert Tibshirani, 2014. "A Simple Method for Estimating Interactions Between a Treatment and a Large Number of Covariates," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 109(508), pages 1517-1532, December.
    16. Eric B. Laber & Kristin A. Linn & Leonard A. Stefanski, 2014. "Interactive model building for Q-learning," Biometrika, Biometrika Trust, vol. 101(4), pages 831-847.
    17. Fan J. & Li R., 2001. "Variable Selection via Nonconcave Penalized Likelihood and its Oracle Properties," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 96, pages 1348-1360, 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. Kara E. Rudolph & Iván Díaz, 2022. "When the ends do not justify the means: Learning who is predicted to have harmful indirect effects," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 185(S2), pages 573-589, December.
    2. Yingchao Zhong & Chang Wang & Lu Wang, 2021. "Survival Augmented Patient Preference Incorporated Reinforcement Learning to Evaluate Tailoring Variables for Personalized Healthcare," Stats, MDPI, vol. 4(4), pages 1-17, September.
    3. Zhen Li & Jie Chen & Eric Laber & Fang Liu & Richard Baumgartner, 2023. "Optimal Treatment Regimes: A Review and Empirical Comparison," International Statistical Review, International Statistical Institute, vol. 91(3), pages 427-463, December.

    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. Q. Clairon & R. Henderson & N. J. Young & E. D. Wilson & C. J. Taylor, 2021. "Adaptive treatment and robust control," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 77(1), pages 223-236, March.
    2. Ruoqing Zhu & Ying-Qi Zhao & Guanhua Chen & Shuangge Ma & Hongyu Zhao, 2017. "Greedy outcome weighted tree learning of optimal personalized treatment rules," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 73(2), pages 391-400, June.
    3. Zhishuai Liu & Jesse Clifton & Eric B. Laber & John Drake & Ethan X. Fang, 2023. "Deep Spatial Q-Learning for Infectious Disease Control," Journal of Agricultural, Biological and Environmental Statistics, Springer;The International Biometric Society;American Statistical Association, vol. 28(4), pages 749-773, December.
    4. Zhen Li & Jie Chen & Eric Laber & Fang Liu & Richard Baumgartner, 2023. "Optimal Treatment Regimes: A Review and Empirical Comparison," International Statistical Review, International Statistical Institute, vol. 91(3), pages 427-463, December.
    5. Eric B. Laber & Anastasios A. Tsiatis & Marie Davidian & Shannon T. Holloway, 2014. "Discussion of “Combining biomarkers to optimize patient treatment recommendation”," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 70(3), pages 707-710, September.
    6. Qian Guan & Eric B. Laber & Brian J. Reich, 2016. "Comment," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 111(515), pages 936-942, July.
    7. Michael P. Wallace & Erica E. M. Moodie, 2015. "Doubly‐robust dynamic treatment regimen estimation via weighted least squares," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 71(3), pages 636-644, September.
    8. Yunan Wu & Lan Wang, 2021. "Resampling‐based confidence intervals for model‐free robust inference on optimal treatment regimes," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 77(2), pages 465-476, June.
    9. Eric B. Laber & Daniel J. Lizotte & Bradley Ferguson, 2014. "Set-valued dynamic treatment regimes for competing outcomes," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 70(1), pages 53-61, March.
    10. Kristin A. Linn & Eric B. Laber & Leonard A. Stefanski, 2017. "Interactive -Learning for Quantiles," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 112(518), pages 638-649, April.
    11. Xin Qiu & Donglin Zeng & Yuanjia Wang, 2018. "Estimation and evaluation of linear individualized treatment rules to guarantee performance," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 74(2), pages 517-528, June.
    12. Boyi Guo & Hannah D. Holscher & Loretta S. Auvil & Michael E. Welge & Colleen B. Bushell & Janet A. Novotny & David J. Baer & Nicholas A. Burd & Naiman A. Khan & Ruoqing Zhu, 2023. "Estimating Heterogeneous Treatment Effect on Multivariate Responses Using Random Forests," Statistics in Biosciences, Springer;International Chinese Statistical Association, vol. 15(3), pages 545-561, December.
    13. Giorgos Bakoyannis, 2023. "Estimating optimal individualized treatment rules with multistate processes," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 79(4), pages 2830-2842, December.
    14. Hongming Pu & Bo Zhang, 2021. "Estimating optimal treatment rules with an instrumental variable: A partial identification learning approach," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 83(2), pages 318-345, April.
    15. Zhang, Haixiang & Huang, Jian & Sun, Liuquan, 2020. "A rank-based approach to estimating monotone individualized two treatment regimes," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    16. Dana Johnson & Wenbin Lu & Marie Davidian, 2023. "A general framework for subgroup detection via one‐step value difference estimation," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 79(3), pages 2116-2126, September.
    17. Jin Wang & Donglin Zeng & D. Y. Lin, 2022. "Semiparametric single-index models for optimal treatment regimens with censored outcomes," Lifetime Data Analysis: An International Journal Devoted to Statistical Methods and Applications for Time-to-Event Data, Springer, vol. 28(4), pages 744-763, October.
    18. Ying Huang & Youyi Fong, 2014. "Identifying optimal biomarker combinations for treatment selection via a robust kernel method," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 70(4), pages 891-901, December.
    19. Yizhe Xu & Tom H. Greene & Adam P. Bress & Brandon K. Bellows & Yue Zhang & Zugui Zhang & Paul Kolm & William S. Weintraub & Andrew S. Moran & Jincheng Shen, 2022. "An Efficient Approach for Optimizing the Cost-effective Individualized Treatment Rule Using Conditional Random Forest," Papers 2204.10971, arXiv.org.
    20. Weibin Mo & Yufeng Liu, 2022. "Efficient learning of optimal individualized treatment rules for heteroscedastic or misspecified treatment‐free effect models," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 84(2), pages 440-472, April.

    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:74:y:2018:i:1:p:18-26. 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.