Accounting for selection and correlation in the analysis of two-stage genome-wide association studies

Adjusting for treatment selection in phase II/III clinical trials with time to event data

Phase II/III clinical trials are efficient two-stage designs that test multiple experimental treatments. In stage 1, patients are allocated to the control and all experimental treatments, with the data collected from them used to select experimental treatments to continue to stage 2. Patients recruited in stage 2 are allocated to the selected treatments and the control. Combined data of stage 1 and stage 2 are used for a confirmatory phase III analysis. Appropriate analysis needs to adjust for selection bias of the stage 1 data. Point estimators exist for normally distributed outcome data. Extending these estimators to time to event data is not straightforward because treatment selection is based on correlated treatment effects and stage 1 patients who do not get events in stage 1 are followed-up in stage 2. We have derived an approximately uniformly minimum variance conditional unbiased estimator (UMVCUE) and compared its biases and mean squared errors to existing bias adjusted estimators. In simulations, one existing bias adjusted estimator has similar properties as the practically unbiased UMVCUE while the others can have noticeable biases but they are less variable than the UMVCUE. For confirmatory phase II/III clinical trials where unbiased estimators are desired, we recommend the UMVCUE or the existing estimator with which it has similar properties.

The benefits of covariate adjustment for adaptive multi-arm designs

Covariate adjustment via a regression approach is known to increase the precision of statistical inference when fixed trial designs are employed in randomized controlled studies. When an adaptive multi-arm design is employed with the ability to select treatments, it is unclear how covariate adjustment affects various aspects of the study. Consider the design framework that relies on pre-specified treatment selection rule(s) and a combination test approach for hypothesis testing. It is our primary goal to evaluate the impact of covariate adjustment on adaptive multi-arm designs with treatment selection. Our secondary goal is to show how the Uniformly Minimum Variance Conditionally Unbiased Estimator can be extended to account for covariate adjustment analytically. We find that adjustment with different sets of covariates can lead to different treatment selection outcomes and hence probabilities of rejecting hypotheses. Nevertheless, we do not see any negative impact on the control of the familywise error rate when covariates are included in the analysis model. When adjusting for covariates that are moderately or highly correlated with the outcome, we see various benefits to the analysis of the design. Conversely, there is negligible impact when including covariates that are uncorrelated with the outcome. Overall, pre-specification of covariate adjustment is recommended for the analysis of adaptive multi-arm design with treatment selection. Having the statistical analysis plan in place prior to the interim and final analyses is crucial, especially when a non-collapsible measure of treatment effect is considered in the trial.

Conditional information and inference in response-adaptive allocation designs

Response-adaptive allocation designs refer to a class of designs where the probability an observation is assigned to a treatment is changed throughout an experiment based on the accrued responses. Such procedures result in random treatment sample sizes. Most of the current literature considers unconditional inference procedures in the analysis of response-adaptive allocation designs. The focus of this article is inference conditional on the observed treatment sample sizes. The inverse of information is a description of the large sample variance of the parameter estimates. A simple form for the conditional information relative to unconditional information is derived. It is found that conditional information can be greater than unconditional information. A conditional bootstrap procedure is developed that, in the majority of cases examined, resulted in narrower confidence intervals than relevant unconditional procedures.

Point and interval estimation in two-stage adaptive designs with time to event data and biomarker-driven subpopulation selection

In personalized medicine, it is often desired to determine if all patients or only a subset of them benefit from a treatment. We consider estimation in two-stage adaptive designs that in stage 1 recruit patients from the full population. In stage 2, patient recruitment is restricted to the part of the population, which, based on stage 1 data, benefits from the experimental treatment. Existing estimators, which adjust for using stage 1 data for selecting the part of the population from which stage 2 patients are recruited, as well as for the confirmatory analysis after stage 2, do not consider time to event patient outcomes. In this work, for time to event data, we have derived a new asymptotically unbiased estimator for the log hazard ratio and a new interval estimator with good coverage probabilities and probabilities that the upper bounds are below the true values. The estimators are appropriate for several selection rules that are based on a single or multiple biomarkers, which can be categorical or continuous.

Point estimation following two-stage adaptive threshold enrichment clinical trials

Recently, several study designs incorporating treatment effect assessment in biomarker-based subpopulations have been proposed. Most statistical methodologies for such designs focus on the control of type I error rate and power. In this paper, we have developed point estimators for clinical trials that use the two-stage adaptive enrichment threshold design. The design consists of two stages, where in stage 1, patients are recruited in the full population. Stage 1 outcome data are then used to perform interim analysis to decide whether the trial continues to stage 2 with the full population or a subpopulation. The subpopulation is defined based on one of the candidate threshold values of a numerical predictive biomarker. To estimate treatment effect in the selected subpopulation, we have derived unbiased estimators, shrinkage estimators, and estimators that estimate bias and subtract it from the naive estimate. We have recommended one of the unbiased estimators. However, since none of the estimators dominated in all simulation scenarios based on both bias and mean squared error, an alternative strategy would be to use a hybrid estimator where the estimator used depends on the subpopulation selected. This would require a simulation study of plausible scenarios before the trial.

Stepwise approach to SNP-set analysis illustrated with the Metabochip and colorectal cancer in Japanese Americans of the Multiethnic Cohort

BACKGROUND

Common variants have explained less than the amount of heritability expected for complex diseases, which has led to interest in less-common variants and more powerful approaches to the analysis of whole-genome scans. Because of low frequency (low statistical power), less-common variants are best analyzed using SNP-set methods such as gene-set or pathway-based analyses. However, there is as yet no clear consensus regarding how to focus in on potential risk variants following set-based analyses. We used a stepwise, telescoping approach to analyze common- and rare-variant data from the Illumina Metabochip array to assess genomic association with colorectal cancer (CRC) in the Japanese sub-population of the Multiethnic Cohort (676 cases, 7180 controls). We started with pathway analysis of SNPs that are in genes and pathways having known mechanistic roles in colorectal cancer, then focused on genes within the pathways that evidenced association with CRC, and finally assessed individual SNPs within the genes that evidenced association. Pathway SNPs downloaded from the dbSNP database were cross-matched with Metabochip SNPs and analyzed using the logistic kernel machine regression approach (logistic SNP-set kernel-machine association test, or sequence kernel association test; SKAT) and related methods.

RESULTS

The TGF-β and WNT pathways were associated with all CRC, and the WNT pathway was associated with colon cancer. Individual genes demonstrating the strongest associations were TGFBR2 in the TGF-β pathway and SMAD7 (which is involved in both the TGF-β and WNT pathways). As partial validation of our approach, a known CRC risk variant in SMAD7 (in both the TGF-β and WNT pathways: rs11874392) was associated with CRC risk in our data. We also detected two novel candidate CRC risk variants (rs13075948 and rs17025857) in TGFBR2, a gene known to be associated with CRC risk.

CONCLUSIONS

A stepwise, telescoping approach identified some potentially novel risk variants associated with colorectal cancer, so it may be a useful method for following up on results of set-based SNP analyses. Further work is required to assess the statistical characteristics of the approach, and additional applications should aid in better clarifying its utility.

Conditionally unbiased estimation in the normal setting with unknown variances

To efficiently and completely correct for selection bias in adaptive two-stage trials, uniformly minimum variance conditionally unbiased estimators (UMVCUEs) have been derived for trial designs with normally distributed data. However, a common assumption is that the variances are known exactly, which is unlikely to be the case in practice. We extend the work of Cohen and Sackrowitz (Statistics & Probability Letters, 8(3):273-278, 1989), who proposed an UMVCUE for the best performing candidate in the normal setting with a common unknown variance. Our extension allows for multiple selected candidates, as well as unequal stage one and two sample sizes.

Conditional estimation in two-stage adaptive designs

We consider conditional estimation in two-stage sample size adjustable designs and the consequent bias. More specifically, we consider a design which permits raising the sample size when interim results look rather promising, and which retains the originally planned sample size when results look very promising. The estimation procedures reported comprise the unconditional maximum likelihood, the conditionally unbiased Rao-Blackwell estimator, the conditional median unbiased estimator, and the conditional maximum likelihood with and without bias correction. We compare these estimators based on analytical results and a simulation study. We show how they can be applied in a real clinical trial setting.

Unbiased estimation in seamless phase II/III trials with unequal treatment effect variances and hypothesis-driven selection rules

Seamless phase II/III clinical trials offer an efficient way to select an experimental treatment and perform confirmatory analysis within a single trial. However, combining the data from both stages in the final analysis can induce bias into the estimates of treatment effects. Methods for bias adjustment developed thus far have made restrictive assumptions about the design and selection rules followed. In order to address these shortcomings, we apply recent methodological advances to derive the uniformly minimum variance conditionally unbiased estimator for two‐stage seamless phase II/III trials. Our framework allows for the precision of the treatment arm estimates to take arbitrary values, can be utilised for all treatments that are taken forward to phase III and is applicable when the decision to select or drop treatment arms is driven by a multiplicity‐adjusted hypothesis testing procedure. © 2016 The Authors. Statistics in Medicine Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.