An official website of the United States government
Summary Nonparametric covariate adjustment is considered for log-rank-type tests of the treatment effect with right-censored time-to-event data from clinical trials applying covariate-adaptive randomization. Our proposed covariate-adjusted log-rank test has a simple explicit formula and a guaranteed efficiency gain over the unadjusted test. We also show that our proposed test achieves universal applicability in the sense that the same formula of test can be universally applied to simple randomization and all commonly used covariate-adaptive randomization schemes such as the stratified permuted block and the Pocock–Simon minimization, which is not a property enjoyed by the unadjusted log-rank test. Our method is supported by novel asymptotic theory and empirical results for Type-I error and power of tests.
more »
« less
Covariate-adaptive randomization inference in matched designs
Abstract It is common to conduct causal inference in matched observational studies by proceeding as though treatment assignments within matched sets are assigned uniformly at random and using this distribution as the basis for inference. This approach ignores observed discrepancies in matched sets that may be consequential for the distribution of treatment, which are succinctly captured by within-set differences in the propensity score. We address this problem via covariate-adaptive randomization inference, which modifies the permutation probabilities to vary with estimated propensity score discrepancies and avoids requirements to exclude matched pairs or model an outcome variable. We show that the test achieves type I error control arbitrarily close to the nominal level when large samples are available for propensity score estimation. We characterize the large-sample behaviour of the new randomization test for a difference-in-means estimator of a constant additive effect. We also show that existing methods of sensitivity analysis generalize effectively to covariate-adaptive randomization inference. Finally, we evaluate the empirical value of combining matching and covariate-adaptive randomization procedures using simulations and analyses of genetic damage among welders and right-heart catheterization in surgical patients.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2142146
- PAR ID:
- 10499631
- Publisher / Repository:
- Oxford University Press
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology
- Volume:
- 86
- Issue:
- 5
- ISSN:
- 1369-7412
- Format(s):
- Medium: X Size: p. 1312-1338
- Size(s):
- p. 1312-1338
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
We propose a model-free framework for sensitivity analysis of individual treatment effects (ITEs), building upon ideas from conformal inference. For any unit, our procedure reports the Γ-value, a number which quantifies the minimum strength of confounding needed to explain away the evidence for ITE. Our approach rests on the reliable predictive inference of counterfactuals and ITEs in situations where the training data are confounded. Under the marginal sensitivity model of [Z. Tan, J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 101, 1619-1637 (2006)], we characterize the shift between the distribution of the observations and that of the counterfactuals. We first develop a general method for predictive inference of test samples from a shifted distribution; we then leverage this to construct covariate-dependent prediction sets for counterfactuals. No matter the value of the shift, these prediction sets (resp. approximately) achieve marginal coverage if the propensity score is known exactly (resp. estimated). We describe a distinct procedure also attaining coverage, however, conditional on the training data. In the latter case, we prove a sharpness result showing that for certain classes of prediction problems, the prediction intervals cannot possibly be tightened. We verify the validity and performance of the methods via simulation studies and apply them to analyze real datasets.more » « less
-
A common goal in observational research is to estimate marginal causal effects in the presence of confounding variables. One solution to this problem is to use the covariate distribution to weight the outcomes such that the data appear randomized. The propensity score is a natural quantity that arises in this setting. Propensity score weights have desirable asymptotic properties, but they often fail to adequately balance covariate data in finite samples. Empirical covariate balancing methods pose as an appealing alternative by exactly balancing the sample moments of the covariate distribution. With this objective in mind, we propose a framework for estimating balancing weights by solving a constrained convex program, where the criterion function to be optimized is a Bregman distance. We then show that the different distances in this class render identical weights to those of other covariate balancing methods. A series of numerical studies are presented to demonstrate these similarities.more » « less
-
Abstract Propensity score weighting is a tool for causal inference to adjust for measured confounders in observational studies. In practice, data often present complex structures, such as clustering, which make propensity score modeling and estimation challenging. In addition, for clustered data, there may be unmeasured cluster-level covariates that are related to both the treatment assignment and outcome. When such unmeasured cluster-specific confounders exist and are omitted in the propensity score model, the subsequent propensity score adjustment may be biased. In this article, we propose a calibration technique for propensity score estimation under the latent ignorable treatment assignment mechanism, i. e., the treatment-outcome relationship is unconfounded given the observed covariates and the latent cluster-specific confounders. We impose novel balance constraints which imply exact balance of the observed confounders and the unobserved cluster-level confounders between the treatment groups. We show that the proposed calibrated propensity score weighting estimator is doubly robust in that it is consistent for the average treatment effect if either the propensity score model is correctly specified or the outcome follows a linear mixed effects model. Moreover, the proposed weighting method can be combined with sampling weights for an integrated solution to handle confounding and sampling designs for causal inference with clustered survey data. In simulation studies, we show that the proposed estimator is superior to other competitors. We estimate the effect of School Body Mass Index Screening on prevalence of overweight and obesity for elementary schools in Pennsylvania.more » « less
-
High-throughput target trial emulation for Alzheimer’s disease drug repurposing with real-world dataTarget trial emulation is the process of mimicking target randomized trials using real-world data, where effective confounding control for unbiased treatment effect estimation remains a main challenge. Although various approaches have been proposed for this challenge, a systematic evaluation is still lacking. Here we emulated trials for thousands of medications from two large-scale real-world data warehouses, covering over 10 years of clinical records for over 170 million patients, aiming to identify new indications of approved drugs for Alzheimer’s disease. We assessed different propensity score models under the inverse probability of treatment weighting framework and suggested a model selection strategy for improved baseline covariate balancing. We also found that the deep learning-based propensity score model did not necessarily outperform logistic regression-based methods in covariate balancing. Finally, we highlighted five top-ranked drugs (pantoprazole, gabapentin, atorvastatin, fluticasone, and omeprazole) originally intended for other indications with potential benefits for Alzheimer’s patients.more » « less
