Volume 34, Issue 3
Research Article

Comparing and combining biomarkers as principal surrogates for time‐to‐event clinical endpoints

Erin E. Gabriel

Corresponding Author

E-mail address: egabriel@fhcrc.org

Vaccine and Infectious Disease Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, U.S.A.

Correspondence to: Erin E. Gabriel, Vaccine and Infectious Disease Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA 98109‐1024, U.S.A.

E‐mail:egabriel@fhcrc.org

Search for more papers by this author
Michael C. Sachs

Biometric Research Branch, National Cancer Institute, Washington, DC, U.S.A.

Search for more papers by this author
Peter B. Gilbert

Vaccine and Infectious Disease Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, U.S.A.

Department of Biostatistics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, U.S.A.

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 28 October 2014
Citations: 13

Abstract

Principal surrogate endpoints are useful as targets for phase I and II trials. In many recent trials, multiple post‐randomization biomarkers are measured. However, few statistical methods exist for comparison of or combination of biomarkers as principal surrogates, and none of these methods to our knowledge utilize time‐to‐event clinical endpoint information. We propose a Weibull model extension of the semi‐parametric estimated maximum likelihood method that allows for the inclusion of multiple biomarkers in the same risk model as multivariate candidate principal surrogates. We propose several methods for comparing candidate principal surrogates and evaluating multivariate principal surrogates. These include the time‐dependent and surrogate‐dependent true and false positive fraction, the time‐dependent and the integrated standardized total gain, and the cumulative distribution function of the risk difference. We illustrate the operating characteristics of our proposed methods in simulations and outline how these statistics can be used to evaluate and compare candidate principal surrogates. We use these methods to investigate candidate surrogates in the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Number of times cited according to CrossRef: 13

  • Post-randomization Biomarker Effect Modification Analysis in an HIV Vaccine Clinical Trial, Journal of Causal Inference, 10.1515/jci-2019-0022, 8, 1, (54-69), (2020).
  • A unified evaluation of differential vaccine efficacy, Biometrics, 10.1111/biom.13211, 0, 0, (2020).
  • Evaluating multiple surrogate markers with censored data, Biometrics, 10.1111/biom.13370, 0, 0, (2020).
  • Ongoing Vaccine and Monoclonal Antibody HIV Prevention Efficacy Trials and Considerations for Sequel Efficacy Trial Designs, Statistical Communications in Infectious Diseases, 10.1515/scid-2019-0003, 0, 0, (2019).
  • Assessing the value of a censored surrogate outcome, Lifetime Data Analysis, 10.1007/s10985-019-09473-1, (2019).
  • Inference on treatment effect modification by biomarker response in a three-phase sampling design, Biostatistics, 10.1093/biostatistics/kxy074, (2018).
  • Predictive cluster level surrogacy in the presence of interference, Biostatistics, 10.1093/biostatistics/kxy050, (2018).
  • Evaluation and comparison of predictive individual-level general surrogates, Biostatistics, 10.1093/biostatistics/kxx037, 19, 3, (307-324), (2017).
  • Comparing and combining biomarkers as principal surrogates for time‐to‐event clinical endpoints, Statistics in Medicine, 10.1002/sim.7354, 36, 21, (3440-3440), (2017).
  • Evaluating surrogate marker information using censored data, Statistics in Medicine, 10.1002/sim.7220, 36, 11, (1767-1782), (2017).
  • Augmented trial designs for evaluation of principal surrogates, Biostatistics, 10.1093/biostatistics/kxv055, 17, 3, (453-467), (2016).
  • Predicting Overall Vaccine Efficacy in a New Setting by Re-calibrating Baseline Covariate and Intermediate Response Endpoint Effect Modifiers of Type-Specific Vaccine Efficacy, Epidemiologic Methods, 10.1515/em-2015-0007, 5, 1, (2016).
  • Modeling HIV vaccine trials of the future, Current Opinion in HIV and AIDS, 10.1097/COH.0000000000000314, 11, 6, (620-627), (2016).

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