Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Trials 1/2018

Open Access 01-12-2018 | Methodology

Preventing false discovery of heterogeneous treatment effect subgroups in randomized trials

Authors: Joseph Rigdon, Michael Baiocchi, Sanjay Basu

Published in: Trials | Issue 1/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

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.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
2.
go back to reference Basu S, Sussman JB, Rigdon J, Steimle L, Denton BT, Hayward RA. Benefit and harm of intensive blood pressure treatment: derivation and validation of risk models using data from the SPRINT and ACCORD trials. PLoS Med. 2017;14:e1002410.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Basu S, Sussman JB, Rigdon J, Steimle L, Denton BT, Hayward RA. Benefit and harm of intensive blood pressure treatment: derivation and validation of risk models using data from the SPRINT and ACCORD trials. PLoS Med. 2017;14:e1002410.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
3.
go back to reference Baum A, Scarpa J, Bruzelius E, Tamler R, Basu S, Faghmous J. Targeting weight loss interventions to reduce cardiovascular complications of type 2 diabetes: a machine learning-based post-hoc analysis of heterogeneous treatment effects in the look AHEAD trial. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2017;5:808–15.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Baum A, Scarpa J, Bruzelius E, Tamler R, Basu S, Faghmous J. Targeting weight loss interventions to reduce cardiovascular complications of type 2 diabetes: a machine learning-based post-hoc analysis of heterogeneous treatment effects in the look AHEAD trial. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2017;5:808–15.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
4.
go back to reference Burke JF, Hayward RA, Nelson JP, Kent DM. Using internally developed risk models to assess heterogeneity in treatment effects in clinical trials. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2014;7:163–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Burke JF, Hayward RA, Nelson JP, Kent DM. Using internally developed risk models to assess heterogeneity in treatment effects in clinical trials. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2014;7:163–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
5.
go back to reference Kent DM, Rothwell PM, Ioannidis JP, Altman DG, Hayward RA. Assessing and reporting heterogeneity in treatment effects in clinical trials: a proposal. Trials. 2010;11:85.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Kent DM, Rothwell PM, Ioannidis JP, Altman DG, Hayward RA. Assessing and reporting heterogeneity in treatment effects in clinical trials: a proposal. Trials. 2010;11:85.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
6.
go back to reference Tian L, Alizadeh AA, Gentles AJ, Tibshirani R. A simple method for estimating interactions between a treatment and a large number of covariates. J Am Stat Assoc. 2014;109:1517–32.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Tian L, Alizadeh AA, Gentles AJ, Tibshirani R. A simple method for estimating interactions between a treatment and a large number of covariates. J Am Stat Assoc. 2014;109:1517–32.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
8.
go back to reference Iacus SM, King G, Porro G. Multivariate matching methods that are monotonic imbalance bounding. J Am Stat Assoc. 2011;106:345–61.CrossRef Iacus SM, King G, Porro G. Multivariate matching methods that are monotonic imbalance bounding. J Am Stat Assoc. 2011;106:345–61.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Athey S, Imbens G. Recursive partitioning for heterogeneous causal effects. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2016;113:7353–60.CrossRefPubMed Athey S, Imbens G. Recursive partitioning for heterogeneous causal effects. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2016;113:7353–60.CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Holland PW. Statistics and Causal Inference. J Am Stat Assoc. 1986;81:945–60.CrossRef Holland PW. Statistics and Causal Inference. J Am Stat Assoc. 1986;81:945–60.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Finn RS, Crown JP, Lang I, Boer K, Bondarenko IM, Kulyk SO, et al. The cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor palbociclib in combination with letrozole versus letrozole alone as first-line treatment of oestrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative, advanced breast cancer (PALOMA-1/TRIO-18): a randomised phase 2 study. Lancet Oncol. 2015;16:25–35.CrossRefPubMed Finn RS, Crown JP, Lang I, Boer K, Bondarenko IM, Kulyk SO, et al. The cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor palbociclib in combination with letrozole versus letrozole alone as first-line treatment of oestrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative, advanced breast cancer (PALOMA-1/TRIO-18): a randomised phase 2 study. Lancet Oncol. 2015;16:25–35.CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Group TSR. A randomized trial of intensive versus standard blood-pressure control. N Engl J Med. 2015;373:2103–16.CrossRef Group TSR. A randomized trial of intensive versus standard blood-pressure control. N Engl J Med. 2015;373:2103–16.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Hansen BB, Klopfer SO. Optimal full matching and related designs via network flows. J Comput Graph Stat. 2006;15:609–27.CrossRef Hansen BB, Klopfer SO. Optimal full matching and related designs via network flows. J Comput Graph Stat. 2006;15:609–27.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Hothorn T, Hornik K, Zeileis A. Unbiased recursive partitioning: a conditional inference framework. J Comput Graph Stat. 2006;15:651–74.CrossRef Hothorn T, Hornik K, Zeileis A. Unbiased recursive partitioning: a conditional inference framework. J Comput Graph Stat. 2006;15:651–74.CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Dorresteijn JAN, Visseren FLJ, Ridker PM, Wassink AMJ, Paynter NP, Steyerberg EW, et al. Estimating treatment effects for individual patients based on the results of randomised clinical trials. BMJ. 2011;343:d5888.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Dorresteijn JAN, Visseren FLJ, Ridker PM, Wassink AMJ, Paynter NP, Steyerberg EW, et al. Estimating treatment effects for individual patients based on the results of randomised clinical trials. BMJ. 2011;343:d5888.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
17.
go back to reference Patel KK, Arnold SV, Chan PS, Tang Y, Pokharel Y, Jones PG, et al. Personalizing the intensity of blood pressure control: modeling the heterogeneity of risks and benefits from SPRINT (systolic blood pressure intervention trial). Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2017;10:e003624.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Patel KK, Arnold SV, Chan PS, Tang Y, Pokharel Y, Jones PG, et al. Personalizing the intensity of blood pressure control: modeling the heterogeneity of risks and benefits from SPRINT (systolic blood pressure intervention trial). Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2017;10:e003624.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
18.
go back to reference Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman J. The elements of statistical learning: data mining, inference, and prediction. 2nd ed. New York: Springer; 2011. Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman J. The elements of statistical learning: data mining, inference, and prediction. 2nd ed. New York: Springer; 2011.
19.
go back to reference Liaw A, Wiener M. Classification and regression by RandomForest. R News. 2002;2:18–22. Liaw A, Wiener M. Classification and regression by RandomForest. R News. 2002;2:18–22.
22.
go back to reference Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates; 1988. Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates; 1988.
23.
24.
go back to reference von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gøtzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP, et al. The strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. PLoS Med. 2007;4:e296.CrossRef von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gøtzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP, et al. The strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. PLoS Med. 2007;4:e296.CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Rigdon J, Hudgens MG. Randomization inference for treatment effects on a binary outcome. Stat Med. 2015;34:924–35.CrossRefPubMed Rigdon J, Hudgens MG. Randomization inference for treatment effects on a binary outcome. Stat Med. 2015;34:924–35.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Preventing false discovery of heterogeneous treatment effect subgroups in randomized trials
Authors
Joseph Rigdon
Michael Baiocchi
Sanjay Basu
Publication date
01-12-2018
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Trials / Issue 1/2018
Electronic ISSN: 1745-6215
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-018-2774-5

Other articles of this Issue 1/2018

Trials 1/2018 Go to the issue