View source: R/MufixedContCont.MultS.R
MufixedContCont.MultS | R Documentation |
The function MufixedContCont.MultS
uses the multivariate fixed-effects approach to estimate trial- and individual-level surrogacy when the data of multiple clinical trials are available and multiple surrogates are considered for a single true endpoint. The user can specify whether a (weighted or unweighted) full or reduced model should be fitted. See the Details section below.
MufixedContCont.MultS(Dataset, Endpoints=True~Surr.1+Surr.2,
Treat="Treat", Trial.ID="Trial.ID", Pat.ID="Pat.ID",
Model=c("Full"), Weighted=TRUE, Min.Trial.Size=2, Alpha=.05,
Number.Bootstraps=0, Seed=123)
Dataset |
A |
Endpoints |
An equation in the form |
Treat |
The name of the variable in |
Trial.ID |
The name of the variable in |
Pat.ID |
The name of the variable in |
Model |
The type of model that should be fitted, i.e., |
Weighted |
Logical. If |
Min.Trial.Size |
The minimum number of patients that a trial should contain in order to be included in the analysis. If the number of patients in a trial is smaller than the value specified by |
Alpha |
The |
Number.Bootstraps |
Lee's (Lee, 1971) approach is done by default to obtain confidence intervals around |
Seed |
The seed that is used in the bootstrap. Default |
When the full multivariate mixed-effects model is fitted to assess surrogacy in the meta-analytic framework (for details, see Van der Elst et al., 2023), computational issues often occur. In that situation, the use of simplified model-fitting strategies may be warranted (for details, see Burzykowski et al., 2005; Tibaldi et al., 2003).
The function MufixedContCont.MultS
implements one such strategy, i.e., it uses a two-stage multivariate fixed-effects modelling approach to assess surrogacy.
In the first stage of the analysis, a multivariate linear regression model is fitted. When a full model is requested (by using the argument Model=c("Full")
in the function call), the following model is fitted:
S1_{ij}=\mu_{S1i}+\alpha_{S1i}Z_{ij}+\varepsilon_{S1ij},
S2_{ij}=\mu_{S2i}+\alpha_{S2i}Z_{ij}+\varepsilon_{S2ij},
SK_{ij}=\mu_{SKi}+\alpha_{SKi}Z_{ij}+\varepsilon_{SKij},
T_{ij}=\mu_{Ti}+\beta_{Ti}Z_{ij}+\varepsilon_{Tij},
where Z_{ij}
is the treatment indicator for subject j
in trial i
, \mu_{S1i}
, \mu_{S2i}
, ..., \mu_{SKi}
and \mu_{Ti}
are the fixed trial-specific intercepts for S1
, S2
, ... SK
and T
, and \alpha_{S1i}
, \alpha_{S2i}
, ..., \alpha_{SKi}
and \beta_{Ti}
are the trial-specific treatment effects on the surrogates and the true endpoint, respectively. When a reduced model is requested (by using the argument Model=c("Reduced")
in the function call), the following model is fitted:
S1_{ij}=\mu_{S1}+\alpha_{S1i}Z_{ij}+\varepsilon_{S1ij},
S2_{ij}=\mu_{S2}+\alpha_{S2i}Z_{ij}+\varepsilon_{S2ij},
SK_{ij}=\mu_{SK}+\alpha_{SKi}Z_{ij}+\varepsilon_{SKij},
T_{ij}=\mu_{Ti}+\beta_{Ti}Z_{ij}+\varepsilon_{Tij},
where \mu_{S1}
, \mu_{S2}
, ..., \mu_{SK}
and \mu_{T}
are the common intercepts for the surrogates and the true endpoint (i.e., it is assumed that the intercepts for the surrogates and the true endpoints are identical in all trials). The other parameters are the same as defined above.
In the above models, the error terms \varepsilon_{S1ij}
, \varepsilon_{S2ij}
, ..., \varepsilon_{SKij}
and \varepsilon_{Tij}
are assumed to be mean-zero normally distributed with variance-covariance matrix \bold{\Sigma}
.
Next, the second stage of the analysis is conducted. When a full model is requested by the user (by using the argument Model=c("Full")
in the function call), the following model is fitted:
\widehat{\beta}_{Ti}=\lambda_{0}+\lambda_{1}\widehat{\mu}_{S1i}+
\lambda_{2}\widehat{\alpha}_{S1i}+\lambda_{3}\widehat{\mu}_{S2i}+\lambda_{4}\widehat{\alpha}_{S2i}+...+
\lambda_{2K-1}\widehat{\mu}_{SKi}+\lambda_{2K}\widehat{\alpha}_{SKi}+\varepsilon_{i},
where the parameter estimates are based on the full model that was fitted in stage 1.
When a reduced model is requested by the user (by using the argument Model=c("Reduced")
), the \lambda_{1} \widehat{\mu}_{S1i}
, \lambda_{3} \widehat{\mu}_{S2i}
, ... and \lambda_{2K} \widehat{\mu}_{SKi}
components are dropped from the above expression.
When the argument Weighted=FALSE
is used in the function call, the model that is fitted in stage 2 is an unweighted linear regression model. When a weighted model is requested (using the argument Weighted=TRUE
in the function call), the information that is obtained in stage 1 is weighted according to the number of patients in a trial.
The classical coefficient of determination of the fitted stage 2 model provides an estimate of R^2_{trial}
.
An object of class MufixedContCont.MultS
with components,
Data.Analyze |
Prior to conducting the surrogacy analysis, data of patients who have a missing value for the surrogate and/or the true endpoint are excluded. In addition, the data of trials (i) in which only one type of the treatment was administered, and (ii) in which either the surrogate or the true endpoint was a constant are excluded. In addition, the user can specify the minimum number of patients that a trial should contain in order to include the trial in the analysis. If the number of patients in a trial is smaller than the value specified by |
Obs.Per.Trial |
A |
Results.Stage.1 |
The results of stage 1 of the two-stage model fitting approach: a |
Residuals.Stage.1 |
A |
Results.Stage.2 |
An object of class |
Trial.R2.Lee |
A |
Trial.R2.Boot |
A |
Trial.R2.Adj.Lee |
A |
Trial.R2.Adj.Boot |
A |
Indiv.R2.Lee |
A |
Indiv.R2.Boot |
A |
Fitted.Model.Stage.1 |
The fitted Stage 1 model. |
Model.R2.Indiv |
A linear model that regresses the residuals of T on the residuals of the different surrogates. |
D.Equiv |
The variance-covariance matrix of the trial-specific intercept and treatment effects for the surrogates and true endpoints (when a full model is fitted, i.e., when |
Wim Van der Elst
Burzykowski, T., Molenberghs, G., & Buyse, M. (2005). The evaluation of surrogate endpoints. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Buyse, M., Molenberghs, G., Burzykowski, T., Renard, D., & Geys, H. (2000). The validation of surrogate endpoints in meta-analysis of randomized experiments. Biostatistics, 1, 49-67.
Lee, Y. S. (1971). Tables of the upper percentage points of the multiple correlation. Biometrika, 59, 175-189.
Tibaldi, F., Abrahantes, J. C., Molenberghs, G., Renard, D., Burzykowski, T., Buyse, M., Parmar, M., et al., (2003). Simplified hierarchical linear models for the evaluation of surrogate endpoints. Journal of Statistical Computation and Simulation, 73, 643-658.
Van der Elst et al. (2024). Multivariate surrogate endpoints for normally distributed continuous endpoints in the meta-analytic setting.
MumixedContCont.MultS
## Not run: # time consuming code part
data(PANSS)
# Do a surrogacy analysis with T=Total PANSS score, S1=Negative symptoms
# and S2=Positive symptoms
# Fit a full multivariate fixed-effects model with weighting according to the
# number of patients in stage 2 of the two stage approach to assess surrogacy:
Fit.Neg.Pos <- MufixedContCont.MultS(Dataset = PANSS,
Endpoints = Total ~ Neg+Pos, Model = "Full",
Treat = "Treat", Trial.ID = "Invest", Pat.ID = "Pat.ID")
# Obtain a summary of the results
summary(Fit.Neg.Pos)
## End(Not run)
Add the following code to your website.
For more information on customizing the embed code, read Embedding Snippets.