Many clinical studies on non-mortality outcomes such as quality of life suffer from the problem that the non-mortality outcome can be censored by death, i.e. the non-mortality outcome cannot be measured if the subject dies before the time of measurement. To address the problem that this censoring by death is informative, it is of interest to consider the average effect of the treatment on the non-mortality outcome among subjects whose measurement would not be censored under either treatment or control, which is called the survivor average causal effect (SACE). The SACE is not point identified under usual assumptions but bounds can be constructed. The previous literature on bounding the SACE uses only the survival information before the measurement of the non-mortality outcome. However, survival information after the measurement of the non-mortality outcome could also be informative. For randomized trials, we propose a set of ranked average score assumptions that make use of survival information before and after the measurement of the non-mortality outcome which are plausibly satisfied in many studies and we develop a two-step linear programming approach to obtain the closed form for bounds on the SACE under our assumptions. We also extend our method to randomized trials with non-compliance or observational studies with a valid instrumental variable to obtain bounds on the complier SACE which is presented in on-line supplementary material. We apply our method to a randomized trial of the effect of mechanical ventilation with lower tidal volume versus traditional tidal volume for acute lung injury patients. Our bounds on the SACE are much shorter than the bounds that are obtained by using only the survival information before the measurement of the non-mortality outcome.
- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10173155
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Biostatistics
- ISSN:
- 1465-4644
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
more » « less
Summary -
more » « less
Abstract We consider how to merge a limited amount of data from a randomized controlled trial (RCT) into a much larger set of data from an observational data base (ODB), to estimate an average causal treatment effect. Our methods are based on stratification. The strata are defined in terms of effect moderators as well as propensity scores estimated in the ODB. Data from the RCT are placed into the strata they would have occupied, had they been in the ODB instead. We assume that treatment differences are comparable in the two data sources. Our first “spiked‐in” method simply inserts the RCT data into their corresponding ODB strata. We also consider a data‐driven convex combination of the ODB and RCT treatment effect estimates within each stratum. Using the delta method and simulations, we identify a bias problem with the spiked‐in estimator that is ameliorated by the convex combination estimator. We apply our methods to data from the Women's Health Initiative, a study of thousands of postmenopausal women which has both observational and experimental data on hormone therapy (HT). Using half of the RCT to define a gold standard, we find that a version of the spiked‐in estimator yields lower‐MSE estimates of the causal impact of HT on coronary heart disease than would be achieved using either a small RCT or the observational component on its own.
-
more » « less
Abstract Valid surrogate endpoints S can be used as a substitute for a true outcome of interest T to measure treatment efficacy in a clinical trial. We propose a causal inference approach to validate a surrogate by incorporating longitudinal measurements of the true outcomes using a mixed modeling approach, and we define models and quantities for validation that may vary across the study period using principal surrogacy criteria. We consider a surrogate-dependent treatment efficacy curve that allows us to validate the surrogate at different time points. We extend these methods to accommodate a delayed-start treatment design where all patients eventually receive the treatment. Not all parameters are identified in the general setting. We apply a Bayesian approach for estimation and inference, utilizing more informative prior distributions for selected parameters. We consider the sensitivity of these prior assumptions as well as assumptions of independence among certain counterfactual quantities conditional on pretreatment covariates to improve identifiability. We examine the frequentist properties (bias of point and variance estimates, credible interval coverage) of a Bayesian imputation method. Our work is motivated by a clinical trial of a gene therapy where the functional outcomes are measured repeatedly throughout the trial.
-
We study the problem of learning conditional average treatment effects (CATE) from observational data with unobserved confounders. The CATE function maps baseline covariates to individual causal effect predictions and is key for personalized assessments. Recent work has focused on how to learn CATE under unconfoundedness, i.e., when there are no unobserved confounders. Since CATE may not be identified when unconfoundedness is violated, we develop a functional interval estimator that predicts bounds on the individual causal effects under realistic violations of unconfoundedness. Our estimator takes the form of a weighted kernel estimator with weights that vary adversarially. We prove that our estimator is sharp in that it converges exactly to the tightest bounds possible on CATE when there may be unobserved confounders. Further, we study personalized decision rules derived from our estimator and prove that they achieve optimal minimax regret asymptotically. We assess our approach in a simulation study as well as demonstrate its application in the case of hormone replacement therapy by comparing conclusions from a real observational study and clinical trial.more » « less
-
more » « less
Abstract Studies of social networks provide unique opportunities to assess the causal effects of interventions that may impact more of the population than just those intervened on directly. Such effects are sometimes called peer or spillover effects, and may exist in the presence of interference, that is, when one individual's treatment affects another individual's outcome. Randomization-based inference (RI) methods provide a theoretical basis for causal inference in randomized studies, even in the presence of interference. In this article, we consider RI of the intervention effect in the eX-FLU trial, a randomized study designed to assess the effect of a social distancing intervention on influenza-like-illness transmission in a connected network of college students. The approach considered enables inference about the effect of the social distancing intervention on the per-contact probability of influenza-like-illness transmission in the observed network. The methods allow for interference between connected individuals and for heterogeneous treatment effects. The proposed methods are evaluated empirically via simulation studies, and then applied to data from the eX-FLU trial.
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.1093/biostatistics/kxaa008
