A cautious use of auxiliary outcomes for decision-making in randomized clinical trials
Fuente:
arXiv
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Preprint |
| Published: |
2025
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1866917437880926208 |
|---|---|
| author | Russo, Massimiliano Ventz, Steffen Trippa, Lorenzo |
| author_facet | Russo, Massimiliano Ventz, Steffen Trippa, Lorenzo |
| contents | Clinical trials often collect data on multiple outcomes, such as overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and response to treatment (RT). In most cases, however, study designs only use primary outcome data for interim and final decision-making. In several disease settings, clinically relevant outcomes, for example OS, become available years after patient enrollment. Moreover, the effects of experimental treatments on OS might be less pronounced compared to auxiliary outcomes such as RT. We develop a Bayesian decision-theoretic framework that uses both primary and auxiliary outcomes for interim and final decision-making. The framework allows investigators to control standard frequentist operating characteristics, such as the type I error rate and can be used with auxiliary outcomes from emerging technologies, such as circulating tumor assays. False positive rates and other frequentist operating characteristics are rigorously controlled without any assumption about the concordance between primary and auxiliary outcomes. We discuss algorithms to implement this decision-theoretic approach and show that incorporating auxiliary information into interim and final decision-making can lead to relevant efficiency gains according to established and interpretable metrics. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2501_04187 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2025 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | A cautious use of auxiliary outcomes for decision-making in randomized clinical trials Russo, Massimiliano Ventz, Steffen Trippa, Lorenzo Applications Clinical trials often collect data on multiple outcomes, such as overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and response to treatment (RT). In most cases, however, study designs only use primary outcome data for interim and final decision-making. In several disease settings, clinically relevant outcomes, for example OS, become available years after patient enrollment. Moreover, the effects of experimental treatments on OS might be less pronounced compared to auxiliary outcomes such as RT. We develop a Bayesian decision-theoretic framework that uses both primary and auxiliary outcomes for interim and final decision-making. The framework allows investigators to control standard frequentist operating characteristics, such as the type I error rate and can be used with auxiliary outcomes from emerging technologies, such as circulating tumor assays. False positive rates and other frequentist operating characteristics are rigorously controlled without any assumption about the concordance between primary and auxiliary outcomes. We discuss algorithms to implement this decision-theoretic approach and show that incorporating auxiliary information into interim and final decision-making can lead to relevant efficiency gains according to established and interpretable metrics. |
| title | A cautious use of auxiliary outcomes for decision-making in randomized clinical trials |
| topic | Applications |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.04187 |