Bayesian joint modeling of longitudinal and survival data

The joint modeling of longitudinal and survival data is a new approach to many applications such as HIV, cancer vaccine trials and quality of life studies. There are recent developments of the methodologies with respect to each of the components of the joint model as well as statistical processes that link them together. Among these, second order polynomial random effect models and linear mixed effects models are the most commonly used for the longitudinal trajectory function. In this study, we first relax the parametric constraints for polynomial random effect models by using Dirichlet process priors, then three longitudinal markers rather than only one marker are considered in one joint model. Second, we use a linear mixed effect model for the longitudinal process in a joint model analyzing the three markers. In this research these methods were applied to the Primary Biliary Cirrhosis sequential data, which were collected from a clinical trial of primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC) of the liver. This trial was conducted between 1974 and 1984 at the Mayo Clinic. The effects of three longitudinal markers (1) Total Serum Bilirubin, (2) Serum Albumin and (3) Serum Glutamic-Oxaloacetic transaminase (SGOT) on patients' survival were investigated. Proportion of treatment effect will also be studied using the proposed joint modeling approaches. ^ Based on the results, we conclude that the proposed modeling approaches yield better fit to the data and give less biased parameter estimates for these trajectory functions than previous methods. Model fit is also improved after considering three longitudinal markers instead of one marker only. The results from analysis of proportion of treatment effects from these joint models indicate same conclusion as that from the final model of Fleming and Harrington (1991), which is Bilirubin and Albumin together has stronger impact in predicting patients' survival and as a surrogate endpoints for treatment. ^

Sequential updating via dynamic hierarchical models: A Bayesian approach to longitudinal data analysis

Most statistical analysis, theory and practice, is concerned with static models; models with a proposed set of parameters whose values are fixed across observational units. Static models implicitly assume that the quantified relationships remain the same across the design space of the data. While this is reasonable under many circumstances this can be a dangerous assumption when dealing with sequentially ordered data. The mere passage of time always brings fresh considerations and the interrelationships among parameters, or subsets of parameters, may need to be continually revised. ^ When data are gathered sequentially dynamic interim monitoring may be useful as new subject-specific parameters are introduced with each new observational unit. Sequential imputation via dynamic hierarchical models is an efficient strategy for handling missing data and analyzing longitudinal studies. Dynamic conditional independence models offers a flexible framework that exploits the Bayesian updating scheme for capturing the evolution of both the population and individual effects over time. While static models often describe aggregate information well they often do not reflect conflicts in the information at the individual level. Dynamic models prove advantageous over static models in capturing both individual and aggregate trends. Computations for such models can be carried out via the Gibbs sampler. An application using a small sample repeated measures normally distributed growth curve data is presented. ^

Outcome-based adaptive randomization for binary data in clinical trials---Compare and contrast

Monte Carlo simulation has been conducted to investigate parameter estimation and hypothesis testing in some well known adaptive randomization procedures. The four urn models studied are Randomized Play-the-Winner (RPW), Randomized Pôlya Urn (RPU), Birth and Death Urn with Immigration (BDUI), and Drop-the-Loses Urn (DL). Two sequential estimation methods, the sequential maximum likelihood estimation (SMLE) and the doubly adaptive biased coin design (DABC), are simulated at three optimal allocation targets that minimize the expected number of failures under the assumption of constant variance of simple difference (RSIHR), relative risk (ORR), and odds ratio (OOR) respectively. Log likelihood ratio test and three Wald-type tests (simple difference, log of relative risk, log of odds ratio) are compared in different adaptive procedures. ^ Simulation results indicates that although RPW is slightly better in assigning more patients to the superior treatment, the DL method is considerably less variable and the test statistics have better normality. When compared with SMLE, DABC has slightly higher overall response rate with lower variance, but has larger bias and variance in parameter estimation. Additionally, the test statistics in SMLE have better normality and lower type I error rate, and the power of hypothesis testing is more comparable with the equal randomization. Usually, RSIHR has the highest power among the 3 optimal allocation ratios. However, the ORR allocation has better power and lower type I error rate when the log of relative risk is the test statistics. The number of expected failures in ORR is smaller than RSIHR. It is also shown that the simple difference of response rates has the worst normality among all 4 test statistics. The power of hypothesis test is always inflated when simple difference is used. On the other hand, the normality of the log likelihood ratio test statistics is robust against the change of adaptive randomization procedures. ^

A simulation study using the hybrid statistic and the meta-analysis t-test for data with matched and unmatched subjects in the interim analysis of clinical trials

An interim analysis is usually applied in later phase II or phase III trials to find convincing evidence of a significant treatment difference that may lead to trial termination at an earlier point than planned at the beginning. This can result in the saving of patient resources and shortening of drug development and approval time. In addition, ethics and economics are also the reasons to stop a trial earlier. In clinical trials of eyes, ears, knees, arms, kidneys, lungs, and other clustered treatments, data may include distribution-free random variables with matched and unmatched subjects in one study. It is important to properly include both subjects in the interim and the final analyses so that the maximum efficiency of statistical and clinical inferences can be obtained at different stages of the trials. So far, no publication has applied a statistical method for distribution-free data with matched and unmatched subjects in the interim analysis of clinical trials. In this simulation study, the hybrid statistic was used to estimate the empirical powers and the empirical type I errors among the simulated datasets with different sample sizes, different effect sizes, different correlation coefficients for matched pairs, and different data distributions, respectively, in the interim and final analysis with 4 different group sequential methods. Empirical powers and empirical type I errors were also compared to those estimated by using the meta-analysis t-test among the same simulated datasets. Results from this simulation study show that, compared to the meta-analysis t-test commonly used for data with normally distributed observations, the hybrid statistic has a greater power for data observed from normally, log-normally, and multinomially distributed random variables with matched and unmatched subjects and with outliers. Powers rose with the increase in sample size, effect size, and correlation coefficient for the matched pairs. In addition, lower type I errors were observed estimated by using the hybrid statistic, which indicates that this test is also conservative for data with outliers in the interim analysis of clinical trials.^