A unifying approach for surrogate marker validation based on Prentice's criteria
- PMID: 16220497
- DOI: 10.1002/sim.2315
A unifying approach for surrogate marker validation based on Prentice's criteria
Abstract
Part of the recent literature on the evaluation of surrogate endpoints starts from a multi-trial approach which leads to a definition of validity in terms of the quality of both trial-level and individual-level association between a potential surrogate and a true endpoint, Buyse et al. These authors proposed their methodology based on the simplest cross-sectional case in which both the surrogate and the true endpoint are continuous and normally distributed. Different variations to this theme have been implemented for binary responses, times to event, combinations of binary and continuous endpoints, etc. However, a drawback of this methodology is that different settings have led to different definitions to quantify the association at the individual-level. In the longitudinal setting; Alonso et al. defined a class of canonical correlation functions that can be used to study surrogacy at the trial and individual-level. In the present work, we propose a new approach to evaluate surrogacy in the repeated measurements framework, we also show the connection between this proposal and the previous ones reported in the literature. Finally, we extend this concept to the non-normal case using the so-called 'likelihood reduction factor' (LRF) a new validation measure based on some of the Prentice's criteria. We apply the previous methodology using data from two clinical studies in psychiatry and ophthalmology.
Copyright (c) 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Similar articles
-
Validation of surrogate markers in multiple randomized clinical trials with repeated measurements: canonical correlation approach.Biometrics. 2004 Dec;60(4):845-53. doi: 10.1111/j.0006-341X.2004.00239.x. Biometrics. 2004. PMID: 15606404
-
Surrogate marker evaluation from an information theory perspective.Biometrics. 2007 Mar;63(1):180-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1541-0420.2006.00634.x. Biometrics. 2007. PMID: 17447943
-
Alternative methods to evaluate trial level surrogacy.Clin Trials. 2008;5(3):194-208. doi: 10.1177/1740774508091677. Clin Trials. 2008. PMID: 18559408
-
A unified framework for the evaluation of surrogate endpoints in mental-health clinical trials.Stat Methods Med Res. 2010 Jun;19(3):205-36. doi: 10.1177/0962280209105015. Epub 2009 Jul 16. Stat Methods Med Res. 2010. PMID: 19608602 Review.
-
Statistical evaluation of biomarkers as surrogate endpoints: a literature review.Stat Med. 2006 Jan 30;25(2):183-203. doi: 10.1002/sim.2319. Stat Med. 2006. PMID: 16252272 Review.
Cited by
-
Imaging response assessment in oncology.Cancer Imaging. 2006 Oct 31;6(Spec No A):S126-30. doi: 10.1102/1470-7330.2006.9039. Cancer Imaging. 2006. PMID: 17114065 Free PMC article.
-
Considerations for development of surrogate endpoints for antifracture efficacy of new treatments in osteoporosis: a perspective.J Bone Miner Res. 2008 Aug;23(8):1155-67. doi: 10.1359/jbmr.080301. J Bone Miner Res. 2008. PMID: 18318643 Free PMC article.
-
Informed decision-making: Statistical methodology for surrogacy evaluation and its role in licensing and reimbursement assessments.Pharm Stat. 2022 Jul;21(4):740-756. doi: 10.1002/pst.2219. Pharm Stat. 2022. PMID: 35819121 Free PMC article. Review.
-
The use of FDG-PET in diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL): predicting outcome following first line therapy.Cancer Imaging. 2014 Nov 29;14(1):34. doi: 10.1186/s40644-014-0034-9. Cancer Imaging. 2014. PMID: 25608713 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Biomarkers and surrogate end points--the challenge of statistical validation.Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2010 Jun;7(6):309-17. doi: 10.1038/nrclinonc.2010.43. Epub 2010 Apr 6. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2010. PMID: 20368727 Review.