Author
Listed:
- Stefan Buchka
- Joachim Havla
- Begüm Irmak Ön
- Raphael Rehms
- Ulrich Mansmann
Abstract
Background: Individual-level surrogacy (ILS) assesses how well a surrogate endpoint predicts treatment effect at the individual level. The paper discusses mutual information (MI) and the likelihood reduction factor (LRF) as ways to quantify ILS. It also reassesses ILS statements for people with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) by using T2 MRI lesions (T2L) as surrogates for disability and disease activity. ILS is often reported using inadequate concepts, e.g. subgroup analysis, correlation, odds ratios, sensitivity/specificity, or metrics based on Prentice’s criteria. Methods: LRF assesses ILS quality by determining prediction quality through shared information (MI) between surrogate(s) and clinical endpoint(s). A simulation study validates LRF as a measure of ILS quality. Individual-level data from ten randomized controlled trials (n = 5673) provided longitudinal information on T2L, T2 MRI lesion volumes (T2V), future disability progression (EDSS), and relapses. LRFs for different scenarios were calculated. Results were compared to those obtained by methods commonly applied in RRMS literature. Results: Simulations confirmed the robustness of LRF as a reliable ILS quality measure. Two of ten trials showed weak ILS between T2V and EDSS (LRF = 0.21, CI95%: 0.16–0.26; LRF = 0.28, CI95%: 0.23–0.34). Other LRFs were below 0.2. A method commonly used in the MS literature also showed no strong ILS. Conclusion: LRF is an important measure to quantify ILS and prediction quality. But it is rarely applied in RRMS research. LRF did not reveal robust surrogacy patterns when applied to data of ten clinical trials. Existing surrogacy claims should be reassessed since ILS assessments in the MS literature may have major limitations.
Suggested Citation
Stefan Buchka & Joachim Havla & Begüm Irmak Ön & Raphael Rehms & Ulrich Mansmann, 2025.
"Individual-level surrogacy of MRI lesions for disease severity in RRMS: Methods to quantify predictive power and their application to longitudinal data from recent trials,"
PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 20(12), pages 1-19, December.
Handle:
RePEc:plo:pone00:0337893
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0337893
Download full text from publisher
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:plo:pone00:0337893. 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.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.