Dataset Information

Synergistic markers based on inter-covariate association estimate treatment option with lower propensity to covariates.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Propensity constitutes a common problem in identifying clinical outcome prediction model whose covariates include the treatment option, which is assumed to be randomly assigned but indeed dependent of other covariates in the training data. The genuine effect of treatment option cannot be elucidated under the influence of propensity. Existing approaches, such as matched-pairs study design, still cannot solve the problem for imbalanced or small datasets.

Methods

This work proposed an anti-propensity estimate of treatment option, which is generated by support vector classifier based on two synergistic markers that represent the lower and upper limits of inter-covariate association level. The algorithm for generating the synergistic markers was illustrated and the performance was evaluated on a public dataset of gene expression levels, which were obtained from surgically excised tumor samples in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients where treatment option, i.e., adjuvant therapy or not, was known.

Results

Six covariates represented by the expression levels of ZNF217, ERCC3, PMS1, PIK3CB, BARD1, and MAPK1, were selected to generate two synergistic markers and classifier for estimating the adjuvant therapy option with substantially attenuated propensity. The estimation accuracy attained an area under the receiver-operating characteristics curve, 0.78, in the test set.

Conclusions

The proposed synergistic markers demonstrated a parsimonious and anti-propensity estimation of treatment option, which is ready for the further evaluation and application in the clinical outcome prediction model.

SUBMITTER: Chan LWC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10477640 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Synergistic markers based on inter-covariate association estimate treatment option with lower propensity to covariates.

Chan Lawrence Wing Chi LWC Sihoe Alan A

Annals of translational medicine 20230412 10

<h4>Background</h4>Propensity constitutes a common problem in identifying clinical outcome prediction model whose covariates include the treatment option, which is assumed to be randomly assigned but indeed dependent of other covariates in the training data. The genuine effect of treatment option cannot be elucidated under the influence of propensity. Existing approaches, such as matched-pairs study design, still cannot solve the problem for imbalanced or small datasets.<h4>Methods</h4>This work ...[more]

PMID: 37675295

Similar Datasets

Project description:Inverse probability of treatment weighting is a popular propensity score-based approach to estimate marginal treatment effects in observational studies at risk of confounding bias. A major issue when estimating the propensity score is the presence of partially observed covariates. Multiple imputation is a natural approach to handle missing data on covariates: covariates are imputed and a propensity score analysis is performed in each imputed dataset to estimate the treatment effect. The treatment effect estimates from each imputed dataset are then combined to obtain an overall estimate. We call this method MIte. However, an alternative approach has been proposed, in which the propensity scores are combined across the imputed datasets (MIps). Therefore, there are remaining uncertainties about how to implement multiple imputation for propensity score analysis: (a) should we apply Rubin's rules to the inverse probability of treatment weighting treatment effect estimates or to the propensity score estimates themselves? (b) does the outcome have to be included in the imputation model? (c) how should we estimate the variance of the inverse probability of treatment weighting estimator after multiple imputation? We studied the consistency and balancing properties of the MIte and MIps estimators and performed a simulation study to empirically assess their performance for the analysis of a binary outcome. We also compared the performance of these methods to complete case analysis and the missingness pattern approach, which uses a different propensity score model for each pattern of missingness, and a third multiple imputation approach in which the propensity score parameters are combined rather than the propensity scores themselves (MIpar). Under a missing at random mechanism, complete case and missingness pattern analyses were biased in most cases for estimating the marginal treatment effect, whereas multiple imputation approaches were approximately unbiased as long as the outcome was included in the imputation model. Only MIte was unbiased in all the studied scenarios and Rubin's rules provided good variance estimates for MIte. The propensity score estimated in the MIte approach showed good balancing properties. In conclusion, when using multiple imputation in the inverse probability of treatment weighting context, MIte with the outcome included in the imputation model is the preferred approach.

Dataset Information

Synergistic markers based on inter-covariate association estimate treatment option with lower propensity to covariates.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Synergistic markers based on inter-covariate association estimate treatment option with lower propensity to covariates.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets