Volume 16, Issue 2
MAIN PAPER

Model averaging for treatment effect estimation in subgroups

Björn Bornkamp

Corresponding Author

E-mail address: bjoern.bornkamp@novartis.com

Novartis Pharma AG, Basel, CH‐4002 Switzerland

Correspondence

Björn Bornkamp, Novartis Pharma AG, CH‐4002 Basel, Switzerland.

Email: bjoern.bornkamp@novartis.com

Search for more papers by this author
David Ohlssen

Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, East Hanover, New Jersey, 07936‐1080 USA

Search for more papers by this author
Baldur P. Magnusson

Novartis Pharma AG, Basel, CH‐4002 Switzerland

Search for more papers by this author
Heinz Schmidli

Novartis Pharma AG, Basel, CH‐4002 Switzerland

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 09 December 2016
Citations: 15

Abstract

In many clinical trials, biological, pharmacological, or clinical information is used to define candidate subgroups of patients that might have a differential treatment effect. Once the trial results are available, interest will focus on subgroups with an increased treatment effect. Estimating a treatment effect for these groups, together with an adequate uncertainty statement is challenging, owing to the resulting “random high” / selection bias. In this paper, we will investigate Bayesian model averaging to address this problem. The general motivation for the use of model averaging is to realize that subgroup selection can be viewed as model selection, so that methods to deal with model selection uncertainty, such as model averaging, can be used also in this setting. Simulations are used to evaluate the performance of the proposed approach. We illustrate it on an example early‐phase clinical trial.

Number of times cited according to CrossRef: 15

  • Subgroup Analysis: A View from Industry, Design and Analysis of Subgroups with Biopharmaceutical Applications, 10.1007/978-3-030-40105-4_15, (309-330), (2020).
  • Data-Driven and Confirmatory Subgroup Analysis in Clinical Trials, Design and Analysis of Subgroups with Biopharmaceutical Applications, 10.1007/978-3-030-40105-4_3, (33-91), (2020).
  • ECMO, ARDS and meta-analyses: Bayes to the rescue?, Journal of Critical Care, 10.1016/j.jcrc.2020.05.009, (2020).
  • A critical review of graphics for subgroup analyses in clinical trials, Pharmaceutical Statistics, 10.1002/pst.2012, 19, 5, (541-560), (2020).
  • Inference on Selected Subgroups in Clinical Trials, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 10.1080/01621459.2020.1740096, (1-18), (2020).
  • A multiple comparison procedure for dose‐finding trials with subpopulations, Biometrical Journal, 10.1002/bimj.201800111, 62, 1, (53-68), (2019).
  • Adjustment for exploratory cut‐off selection in randomized clinical trials with survival endpoint, Biometrical Journal, 10.1002/bimj.201800302, 62, 3, (627-642), (2019).
  • Bayesian Reduced Rank Regression for Classification, Applications in Statistical Computing, 10.1007/978-3-030-25147-5_2, (19-30), (2019).
  • Bibliography, Exploratory Subgroup Analyses in Clinical Research, 10.1002/9781119536734, (197-215), (2019).
  • New Insights in Computational Methods for Pharmacovigilance: E-Synthesis, a Bayesian Framework for Causal Assessment, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 10.3390/ijerph16122221, 16, 12, (2221), (2019).
  • Model averaging for robust extrapolation in evidence synthesis, Statistics in Medicine, 10.1002/sim.7991, 38, 4, (674-694), (2018).
  • Personalized reproductive medicine: regulatory considerations, Fertility and Sterility, 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2018.03.027, 109, 6, (964-967), (2018).
  • Subgroup identification in clinical trials via the predicted individual treatment effect, PLOS ONE, 10.1371/journal.pone.0205971, 13, 10, (e0205971), (2018).
  • Multiplicity issues in exploratory subgroup analysis, Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics, 10.1080/10543406.2017.1397009, (1-19), (2017).
  • Comparing Approaches to Treatment Effect Estimation for Subgroups in Clinical Trials, Statistics in Biopharmaceutical Research, 10.1080/19466315.2016.1251490, 9, 2, (160-171), (2016).

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.