Dataset Information

A utility-based design for randomized comparative trials with ordinal outcomes and prognostic subgroups.

ABSTRACT: A design is proposed for randomized comparative trials with ordinal outcomes and prognostic subgroups. The design accounts for patient heterogeneity by allowing possibly different comparative conclusions within subgroups. The comparative testing criterion is based on utilities for the levels of the ordinal outcome and a Bayesian probability model. Designs based on two alternative models that include treatment-subgroup interactions are considered, the proportional odds model and a non-proportional odds model with a hierarchical prior that shrinks toward the proportional odds model. A third design that assumes homogeneity and ignores possible treatment-subgroup interactions also is considered. The three approaches are applied to construct group sequential designs for a trial of nutritional prehabilitation versus standard of care for esophageal cancer patients undergoing chemoradiation and surgery, including both untreated patients and salvage patients whose disease has recurred following previous therapy. A simulation study is presented that compares the three designs, including evaluation of within-subgroup type I and II error probabilities under a variety of scenarios including different combinations of treatment-subgroup interactions.

SUBMITTER: Murray TA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6054910 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A utility-based design for randomized comparative trials with ordinal outcomes and prognostic subgroups.

Murray Thomas A TA Yuan Ying Y Thall Peter F PF Elizondo Joan H JH Hofstetter Wayne L WL

Biometrics 20180122 3

A design is proposed for randomized comparative trials with ordinal outcomes and prognostic subgroups. The design accounts for patient heterogeneity by allowing possibly different comparative conclusions within subgroups. The comparative testing criterion is based on utilities for the levels of the ordinal outcome and a Bayesian probability model. Designs based on two alternative models that include treatment-subgroup interactions are considered, the proportional odds model and a non-proportiona ...[more]

PMID: 29359314

Similar Datasets

Project description:Importance:Prognostic models may provide insight into clinical trial results and inform the clinical management of patients with BRAF V600-mutated metastatic melanoma. Objective:To identify subgroups with distinct survival outcomes based on clinical and genomic characteristics and to assess survival in identified prognostic subgroups across cohorts treated with dacarbazine, vemurafenib, or cobimetinib plus vemurafenib. Design, Setting, and Participants:This retrospective and exploratory recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) modeled associations between prespecified covariates and survival outcomes using pooled data from the BRIM-2, BRIM-3, BRIM-7, and coBRIM studies. Interventions:Dacarbazine, vemurafenib, or cobimetinib plus vemurafenib. Main Outcomes and Measures:Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results:The RPA included 1365 patients (783 men; 57.4%). Of these, 1032 (75.6%) were older than 65 years; 310 received cobimetinib plus vemurafenib; 717, vemurafenib alone; and 338, dacarbazine. Median follow-up was 14.1 months (interquartile range, 6.3-28.3 months). In the RPA that included all patients, baseline lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) level, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS), presence or absence of liver metastases, and baseline sum of longest diameters of target lesions (SLDs) were significant prognostic factors for PFS: Median PFS was longest in patients with lower LDH (?2?×?upper limit of normal [ULN]), ECOG PS 0, and shorter SLD (?44 mm) (11.1 months; 95% CI, 7.0-18.4 months), and shortest in those with elevated LDH (>2?×?ULN) (3.5 months; 95% CI, 3.0-3.8 months). The subgroup with normal baseline LDH and no liver metastases had the longest median OS (22.7 months; 95% CI, 20.3-27.2 months). Similar PFS trends were observed when these prognostic subgroups were applied to the cobimetinib plus vemurafenib, vemurafenib alone, and dacarbazine cohorts. Baseline LDH, ECOG PS, and SLD were significant prognostic factors for OS: Median OS was longest in patients with normal LDH and shorter SLD (?45 mm) (27.2 months; 95% CI, 22.1-32.1 months) and shortest in those with elevated LDH (>2?×?ULN) (6.0 months; 95% CI, 5.3-6.8 months). Among patients in the most favorable subgroup (normal LDH and SLD ?45 mm), 3-year OS rates were 53.3% (95% CI, 39.5%-67.1%) in the cobimetinib plus vemurafenib cohort, 35.6% (95% CI, 27.4%-43.8%) in the vemurafenib cohort, and 35.6% (95% CI, 24.8%-46.4%) in the dacarbazine cohort. Among patients with available gene expression data, RPA identified gene signature as a significant prognostic factor for PFS in those with normal LDH; 3-year PFS rates were 21.9%, (95% CI, 15.4%-28.4%) and 8.8% (95% CI, 3.6%-14.1%) in immune and cell cycle signature, respectively. The RPA for OS did not identify gene signature as a significant factor. Conclusions and Relevance:Baseline LDH, ECOG PS, disease burden, and gene signature appear to be key determinants of survival outcomes in patients with BRAF V600-mutated metastatic melanoma treated with BRAF and/or MEK inhibitors. These results are consistent with survival benefits of cobimetinib plus vemurafenib over vemurafenib alone observed in the coBRIM study.

Project description:Background: The increasing prevalence and mortality of gastric cancer (GC) has promoted the urgent need for prognostic signatures to predict the long-term risk and search for therapeutic biomarkers. Methods and materials: A total of 921 GC patients from three GEO cohorts were enrolled in the current study. The GSE15459 and GSE62254 cohorts were used to select the top prognostic gene via the evaluation of the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) values. The GSE84437 cohort was used as the external validation cohort. Least absolute shrinkage and selector operation (LASSO) regression analysis was applied to reduce the feature dimension and construct the prognostic signature. Furthermore, a nomogram was constructed by integrating the independent prognostic analysis and validated by calibration plot, decision curve analysis and clinical impact curve. The molecular features and response to chemo-/immunotherapy among risk subgroups were evaluated by the "MOVICS" and "ESTAMATE" R packages and the SubMap algorithm. Lauren classification and ACRG molecular subtype were obtained to compare with the risk model. Results: Forty-four prognosis-associated genes were identified with a preset cutoff AUC value of 0.65 in both the GSE62254 and GSE15459 cohorts. With the 10-fold cross validation analysis of LASSO, nine genes were selected to construct the nine-consensus-prognostic-gene signature. The signature showed good prognostic value in the GSE62254 (p < 0.001, HR: 3.81, 95% CI: 2.44-5.956) and GSE15459 (p < 0.001, HR: 2.65, 95% CI: 1.892-3.709) cohorts and the external validation GSE84437 cohort (p < 0.001, HR: 2.06, 95% CI: 1.554-2.735). The nomogram constructed based on two independent predictive factors, tumor stage and the signature, predicted events tightly consistent with the actual (Hosmer-Lemeshow p value: 1-year, 0.624; 3-years, 0.795; 5-years, 0.824). For the molecular features, we observed the activation of apical junction, epithelial mesenchymal transition, and immune pathways in the high-risk group, while in the low-risk group, cell cycle associated G2M, E2F and MYC target pathways were activated. Based on the results we obtained, we indicated that gastric patients in the low-risk group are more suitable for 5-fluorouracil therapy, while high-risk group patients are more suitable for anti-CTLA4 immunotherapy, these results need more support in the further studies. After compare with proposed molecular subtypes, we realized that the nine-consensus prognostic gene signature is a powerful addition to identify the gastric patients with poor prognosis. Conclusion: In summary, we constructed a robust nine-consensus-prognostic-gene signature for the prediction of GC prognosis, which can also predict the personalized treatment of GC patients.

Dataset Information

A utility-based design for randomized comparative trials with ordinal outcomes and prognostic subgroups.

Publications

A utility-based design for randomized comparative trials with ordinal outcomes and prognostic subgroups.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets