Cargando…

Preventing false discovery of heterogeneous treatment effect subgroups in randomized trials

BACKGROUND: Heterogeneous treatment effects (HTEs), or systematic differences in treatment effectiveness among participants with different observable features, may be important when applying trial results to clinical practice. Current methods suffer from a potential for false detection of HTEs due t...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rigdon, Joseph, Baiocchi, Michael, Basu, Sanjay
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6048878/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30012181
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-018-2774-5
_version_ 1783340181745565696
author Rigdon, Joseph
Baiocchi, Michael
Basu, Sanjay
author_facet Rigdon, Joseph
Baiocchi, Michael
Basu, Sanjay
author_sort Rigdon, Joseph
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Heterogeneous treatment effects (HTEs), or systematic differences in treatment effectiveness among participants with different observable features, may be important when applying trial results to clinical practice. Current methods suffer from a potential for false detection of HTEs due to imbalances in covariates between candidate subgroups. METHODS: We introduce a new method, matching plus classification and regression trees (mCART), that yields balance in covariates in identified HTE subgroups. We compared mCART to a classical method (logistic regression [LR] with backwards covariate selection using the Akaike information criterion ) and two machine-learning approaches increasingly applied to HTE detection (random forest [RF] and gradient RF) in simulations with a binary outcome with known HTE subgroups. We considered an N = 200 phase II oncology trial where there were either no HTEs (1A) or two HTE subgroups (1B) and an N = 6000 phase III cardiovascular disease trial where there were either no HTEs (2A) or four HTE subgroups (2B). Additionally, we considered an N = 6000 phase III cardiovascular disease trial where there was no average treatment effect but there were four HTE subgroups (2C). RESULTS: In simulations 1A and 2A (no HTEs), mCART did not identify any HTE subgroups, whereas LR found 2 and 448, RF 5 and 2, and gradient RF 5 and 24, respectively (all false positives). In simulation 1B, mCART failed to identify the two true HTE subgroups whereas LR found 4, RF 6, and gradient RF 10 (half or more of which were false positives). In simulations 2B and 2C, mCART captured the four true HTE subgroups, whereas the other methods found only false positives. All HTE subgroups identified by mCART had acceptable treated vs. control covariate balance with absolute standardized differences less than 0.2, whereas the absolute standardized differences for the other methods typically exceeded 0.2. The imbalance in covariates in identified subgroups for LR, RF, and gradient RF indicates the false HTE detection may have been due to confounding. CONCLUSIONS: Covariate imbalances may be producing false positives in subgroup analyses. mCART could be a useful tool to help prevent the false discovery of HTE subgroups in secondary analyses of randomized trial data.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6048878
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-60488782018-07-19 Preventing false discovery of heterogeneous treatment effect subgroups in randomized trials Rigdon, Joseph Baiocchi, Michael Basu, Sanjay Trials Methodology BACKGROUND: Heterogeneous treatment effects (HTEs), or systematic differences in treatment effectiveness among participants with different observable features, may be important when applying trial results to clinical practice. Current methods suffer from a potential for false detection of HTEs due to imbalances in covariates between candidate subgroups. METHODS: We introduce a new method, matching plus classification and regression trees (mCART), that yields balance in covariates in identified HTE subgroups. We compared mCART to a classical method (logistic regression [LR] with backwards covariate selection using the Akaike information criterion ) and two machine-learning approaches increasingly applied to HTE detection (random forest [RF] and gradient RF) in simulations with a binary outcome with known HTE subgroups. We considered an N = 200 phase II oncology trial where there were either no HTEs (1A) or two HTE subgroups (1B) and an N = 6000 phase III cardiovascular disease trial where there were either no HTEs (2A) or four HTE subgroups (2B). Additionally, we considered an N = 6000 phase III cardiovascular disease trial where there was no average treatment effect but there were four HTE subgroups (2C). RESULTS: In simulations 1A and 2A (no HTEs), mCART did not identify any HTE subgroups, whereas LR found 2 and 448, RF 5 and 2, and gradient RF 5 and 24, respectively (all false positives). In simulation 1B, mCART failed to identify the two true HTE subgroups whereas LR found 4, RF 6, and gradient RF 10 (half or more of which were false positives). In simulations 2B and 2C, mCART captured the four true HTE subgroups, whereas the other methods found only false positives. All HTE subgroups identified by mCART had acceptable treated vs. control covariate balance with absolute standardized differences less than 0.2, whereas the absolute standardized differences for the other methods typically exceeded 0.2. The imbalance in covariates in identified subgroups for LR, RF, and gradient RF indicates the false HTE detection may have been due to confounding. CONCLUSIONS: Covariate imbalances may be producing false positives in subgroup analyses. mCART could be a useful tool to help prevent the false discovery of HTE subgroups in secondary analyses of randomized trial data. BioMed Central 2018-07-16 /pmc/articles/PMC6048878/ /pubmed/30012181 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-018-2774-5 Text en © The Author(s). 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Methodology
Rigdon, Joseph
Baiocchi, Michael
Basu, Sanjay
Preventing false discovery of heterogeneous treatment effect subgroups in randomized trials
title Preventing false discovery of heterogeneous treatment effect subgroups in randomized trials
title_full Preventing false discovery of heterogeneous treatment effect subgroups in randomized trials
title_fullStr Preventing false discovery of heterogeneous treatment effect subgroups in randomized trials
title_full_unstemmed Preventing false discovery of heterogeneous treatment effect subgroups in randomized trials
title_short Preventing false discovery of heterogeneous treatment effect subgroups in randomized trials
title_sort preventing false discovery of heterogeneous treatment effect subgroups in randomized trials
topic Methodology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6048878/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30012181
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-018-2774-5
work_keys_str_mv AT rigdonjoseph preventingfalsediscoveryofheterogeneoustreatmenteffectsubgroupsinrandomizedtrials
AT baiocchimichael preventingfalsediscoveryofheterogeneoustreatmenteffectsubgroupsinrandomizedtrials
AT basusanjay preventingfalsediscoveryofheterogeneoustreatmenteffectsubgroupsinrandomizedtrials