The balanced survivor average causal effect

A comparison of methods to estimate the survivor average causal effect in the presence of missing data: a simulation study

BACKGROUND

Attrition due to death and non-attendance are common sources of bias in studies of age-related diseases. A simulation study is presented to compare two methods for estimating the survivor average causal effect (SACE) of a binary exposure (sex-specific dietary iron intake) on a binary outcome (age-related macular degeneration, AMD) in this setting.

METHODS

A dataset of 10,000 participants was simulated 1200 times under each scenario with outcome data missing dependent on measured and unmeasured covariates and survival. Scenarios differed by the magnitude and direction of effect of an unmeasured confounder on both survival and the outcome, and whether participants who died following a protective exposure would also die if they had not received the exposure (validity of the monotonicity assumption). The performance of a marginal structural model (MSM, weighting for exposure, survival and missing data) was compared to a sensitivity approach for estimating the SACE. As an illustrative example, the SACE of iron intake on AMD was estimated using data from 39,918 participants of the Melbourne Collaborative Cohort Study.

RESULTS

The MSM approach tended to underestimate the true magnitude of effect when the unmeasured confounder had opposing directions of effect on survival and the outcome. Overestimation was observed when the unmeasured confounder had the same direction of effect on survival and the outcome. Violation of the monotonicity assumption did not increase bias. The estimates were similar between the MSM approach and the sensitivity approach assessed at the sensitivity parameter of 1 (assuming no survival bias). In the illustrative example, high iron intake was found to be protective of AMD (adjusted OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.40-0.82) using complete case analysis via traditional logistic regression. The adjusted SACE odds ratio did not differ substantially from the complete case estimate, ranging from 0.54 to 0.58 for each of the SACE methods.

CONCLUSIONS

On average, MSMs with weighting for exposure, missing data and survival produced biased estimates of the SACE in the presence of an unmeasured survival-outcome confounder. The direction and magnitude of effect of unmeasured survival-outcome confounders should be considered when assessing exposure-outcome associations in the presence of attrition due to death.

Assessing the ratio of means as a causal estimand in clinical endpoint bioequivalence studies in the presence of intercurrent events

In clinical endpoint bioequivalence studies, the observed per-protocol (PP) population (compliers and completers in general) is usually used in the primary analysis for equivalence assessment. However, intercurrent events, ie, missingness and noncompliance, are not properly handled. The resulting estimand is not causal. Previously, we proposed the first causal framework to assess equivalence in the presence of missing data and noncompliance. We proposed a causal survivor average causal effect (SACE) estimand for the difference of means (DOM). In equivalence assessment, DOM is not as widely used as the ratio of means (ROM). However, no existing formula links the observed PP estimand to the SACE estimand for ROM as exists for DOM. Herein, we propose a similar causal framework for ROM using the principal stratification approach, one of the strategies recommended by the International Conference on Harmonisation (ICH) E9 R1 addendum. We quantify the bias of the observed ROM PP estimand for the SACE estimand, which provides a basis to identify three conditions under which the two estimands are equal. We propose a sensitivity analysis method to evaluate the robustness of the current PP estimator to estimate the SACE estimand. We extend Fieller's confidence interval for the SACE estimand using ROM, which can be applied to many settings. Simulation demonstrates that the PP estimator is biased in either directions and may inflate type 1 error and/or change power when the three identified conditions are violated. Our work can be applied to comparative clinical biosimilar studies.

simcausal R Package: Conducting Transparent and Reproducible Simulation Studies of Causal Effect Estimation with Complex Longitudinal Data

The simcausal R package is a tool for specification and simulation of complex longitudinal data structures that are based on non-parametric structural equation models. The package aims to provide a flexible tool for simplifying the conduct of transparent and reproducible simulation studies, with a particular emphasis on the types of data and interventions frequently encountered in real-world causal inference problems, such as, observational data with time-dependent confounding, selection bias, and random monitoring processes. The package interface allows for concise expression of complex functional dependencies between a large number of nodes, where each node may represent a measurement at a specific time point. The package allows for specification and simulation of counterfactual data under various user-specified interventions (e.g., static, dynamic, deterministic, or stochastic). In particular, the interventions may represent exposures to treatment regimens, the occurrence or non-occurrence of right-censoring events, or of clinical monitoring events. Finally, the package enables the computation of a selected set of user-specified features of the distribution of the counterfactual data that represent common causal quantities of interest, such as, treatment-specific means, the average treatment effects and coefficients from working marginal structural models. The applicability of simcausal is demonstrated by replicating the results of two published simulation studies.

Power and sample size calculations for the Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test in the presence of death-censored observations

We consider a clinical trial of a potentially lethal disease in which patients are randomly assigned to two treatment groups and are followed for a fixed period of time; a continuous endpoint is measured at the end of follow-up. For some patients; however, death (or severe disease progression) may preclude measurement of the endpoint. A statistical analysis that includes only patients with endpoint measurements may be biased. An alternative analysis includes all randomized patients, with rank scores assigned to the patients who are available for the endpoint measurement on the basis of the magnitude of their responses and with 'worst-rank' scores assigned to those patients whose death precluded the measurement of the continuous endpoint. The worst-rank scores are worse than all observed rank scores. The treatment effect is then evaluated using the Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test. In this paper, we derive closed-form formulae for the power and sample size of the Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test when missing measurements of the continuous endpoints because of death are replaced by worst-rank scores. We distinguish two approaches for assigning the worst-rank scores. In the tied worst-rank approach, all deaths are weighted equally, and the worst-rank scores are set to a single value that is worse than all measured responses. In the untied worst-rank approach, the worst-rank scores further rank patients according to their time of death, so that an earlier death is considered worse than a later death, which in turn is worse than all measured responses. In addition, we propose four methods for the implementation of the sample size formulae for a trial with expected early death. We conduct Monte Carlo simulation studies to evaluate the accuracy of our power and sample size formulae and to compare the four sample size estimation methods.