Dataset Information

Decision making and uncertainty quantification for individualized treatments using Bayesian Additive Regression Trees.

ABSTRACT: Individualized treatment rules can improve health outcomes by recognizing that patients may respond differently to treatment and assigning therapy with the most desirable predicted outcome for each individual. Flexible and efficient prediction models are desired as a basis for such individualized treatment rules to handle potentially complex interactions between patient factors and treatment. Modern Bayesian semiparametric and nonparametric regression models provide an attractive avenue in this regard as these allow natural posterior uncertainty quantification of patient specific treatment decisions as well as the population wide value of the prediction-based individualized treatment rule. In addition, via the use of such models, inference is also available for the value of the optimal individualized treatment rules. We propose such an approach and implement it using Bayesian Additive Regression Trees as this model has been shown to perform well in fitting nonparametric regression functions to continuous and binary responses, even with many covariates. It is also computationally efficient for use in practice. With Bayesian Additive Regression Trees, we investigate a treatment strategy which utilizes individualized predictions of patient outcomes from Bayesian Additive Regression Trees models. Posterior distributions of patient outcomes under each treatment are used to assign the treatment that maximizes the expected posterior utility. We also describe how to approximate such a treatment policy with a clinically interpretable individualized treatment rule, and quantify its expected outcome. The proposed method performs very well in extensive simulation studies in comparison with several existing methods. We illustrate the usage of the proposed method to identify an individualized choice of conditioning regimen for patients undergoing hematopoietic cell transplantation and quantify the value of this method of choice in relation to the optimal individualized treatment rule as well as non-individualized treatment strategies.

SUBMITTER: Logan BR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6028324 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Decision making and uncertainty quantification for individualized treatments using Bayesian Additive Regression Trees.

Logan Brent R BR Sparapani Rodney R McCulloch Robert E RE Laud Purushottam W PW

Statistical methods in medical research 20171218 4

Individualized treatment rules can improve health outcomes by recognizing that patients may respond differently to treatment and assigning therapy with the most desirable predicted outcome for each individual. Flexible and efficient prediction models are desired as a basis for such individualized treatment rules to handle potentially complex interactions between patient factors and treatment. Modern Bayesian semiparametric and nonparametric regression models provide an attractive avenue in this ...[more]

PMID: 29254443

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundStatistical inference based on small datasets, commonly found in precision oncology, is subject to low power and high uncertainty. In these settings, drawing strong conclusions about future research utility is difficult when using standard inferential measures. It is therefore important to better quantify the uncertainty associated with both significant and non-significant results based on small sample sizes.MethodsWe developed a new method, Bayesian Additional Evidence (BAE), that determines (1) how much additional supportive evidence is needed for a non-significant result to reach Bayesian posterior credibility, or (2) how much additional opposing evidence is needed to render a significant result non-credible. Although based in Bayesian analysis, a prior distribution is not needed; instead, the tipping point output is compared to reasonable effect ranges to draw conclusions. We demonstrate our approach in a comparative effectiveness analysis comparing two treatments in a real world biomarker-defined cohort, and provide guidelines for how to apply BAE in practice.ResultsOur initial comparative effectiveness analysis results in a hazard ratio of 0.31 with 95% confidence interval (0.09, 1.1). Applying BAE to this result yields a tipping point of 0.54; thus, an observed hazard ratio of 0.54 or smaller in a replication study would result in posterior credibility for the treatment association. Given that effect sizes in this range are not extreme, and that supportive evidence exists from a similar published study, we conclude that this problem is worthy of further research.ConclusionsOur proposed method provides a useful framework for interpreting analytic results from small datasets. This can assist researchers in deciding how to interpret and continue their investigations based on an initial analysis that has high uncertainty. Although we illustrated its use in estimating parameters based on time-to-event outcomes, BAE easily applies to any normally-distributed estimator, such as those used for analyzing binary or continuous outcomes.

Project description:BackgroundIn medical, social, and behavioral research we often encounter datasets with a multilevel structure and multiple correlated dependent variables. These data are frequently collected from a study population that distinguishes several subpopulations with different (i.e., heterogeneous) effects of an intervention. Despite the frequent occurrence of such data, methods to analyze them are less common and researchers often resort to either ignoring the multilevel and/or heterogeneous structure, analyzing only a single dependent variable, or a combination of these. These analysis strategies are suboptimal: Ignoring multilevel structures inflates Type I error rates, while neglecting the multivariate or heterogeneous structure masks detailed insights.MethodsTo analyze such data comprehensively, the current paper presents a novel Bayesian multilevel multivariate logistic regression model. The clustered structure of multilevel data is taken into account, such that posterior inferences can be made with accurate error rates. Further, the model shares information between different subpopulations in the estimation of average and conditional average multivariate treatment effects. To facilitate interpretation, multivariate logistic regression parameters are transformed to posterior success probabilities and differences between them.ResultsA numerical evaluation compared our framework to less comprehensive alternatives and highlighted the need to model the multilevel structure: Treatment comparisons based on the multilevel model had targeted Type I error rates, while single-level alternatives resulted in inflated Type I errors. Further, the multilevel model was more powerful than a single-level model when the number of clusters was higher. A re-analysis of the Third International Stroke Trial data illustrated how incorporating a multilevel structure, assessing treatment heterogeneity, and combining dependent variables contributed to an in-depth understanding of treatment effects. Further, we demonstrated how Bayes factors can aid in the selection of a suitable model.ConclusionThe method is useful in prediction of treatment effects and decision-making within subpopulations from multiple clusters, while taking advantage of the size of the entire study sample and while properly incorporating the uncertainty in a principled probabilistic manner using the full posterior distribution.

Dataset Information

Decision making and uncertainty quantification for individualized treatments using Bayesian Additive Regression Trees.

Publications

Decision making and uncertainty quantification for individualized treatments using Bayesian Additive Regression Trees.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets