Comparative assessment of trial-level surrogacy measures for candidate time-to-event surrogate endpoints in clinical trials

Various meta-analytical approaches have been applied to evaluate putative surrogate endpoints (S) of primary clinical endpoints (T), however a systematic assessment of their performance is lacking. Existing methods in the meta-analytic framework can be grouped into two types-conventional and model-based trial-level surrogacy (TLS) measures. Both conventional and model-based TLS measures assess the ability to predict the treatment effect on T based on an observed treatment effect on putative S. Conventional TLS measures include correlation coefficients and R-square measures from weighted linear regression. Model-based TLS includes Copula R^2 proposed by Burzykowski et al. (2001). We examined and compared the estimation performance of these frequently used surrogacy measures in a large-scale simulation study. The impact of several key factors on the estimation performance was assessed, including the strength of the true surrogacy, the amount of effective information provided by available data, and the range of within-trial treatment effect on S and T. The TLS can be estimated accurately and precisely by both types of surrogacy measures when the true surrogacy is strong, number of trials is large, and the range of within-trial treatment effects is wide. When one or more factors deviate from the ''best'' scenarios, both types of TLS measures tend to underestimate the true surrogacy with increased variability. The estimation performance of conventional measures is similar to model-based measures, but with higher computational efficiency. The findings are applied to a large individual patient data pooled analysis in colon cancer.

[1]  D. DeMets,et al.  Biomarkers and surrogate endpoints: Preferred definitions and conceptual framework , 2001, Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics.

[2]  C. Weir,et al.  Statistical evaluation of biomarkers as surrogate endpoints: a literature review , 2006, Statistics in medicine.

[3]  G. Molenberghs,et al.  The validation of surrogate endpoints in meta-analyses of randomized experiments. , 2000, Biostatistics.

[4]  M J Daniels,et al.  Meta-analysis for the evaluation of potential surrogate markers. , 1997, Statistics in medicine.

[5]  Daniel J Sargent,et al.  Disease-free survival versus overall survival as a primary end point for adjuvant colon cancer studies: individual patient data from 20,898 patients on 18 randomized trials. , 2004, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[6]  R. Prentice Surrogate endpoints in clinical trials: definition and operational criteria. , 1989, Statistics in medicine.

[7]  Geert Molenberghs,et al.  Evaluation of Surrogate Endpoints , 2006, Handbook of Statistical Methods for Randomized Controlled Trials.

[8]  Marissa N Lassere,et al.  The Biomarker-Surrogacy Evaluation Schema: a review of the biomarker-surrogate literature and a proposal for a criterion-based, quantitative, multidimensional hierarchical levels of evidence schema for evaluating the status of biomarkers as surrogate endpoints , 2008, Statistical methods in medical research.

[9]  G. Molenberghs,et al.  Criteria for the validation of surrogate endpoints in randomized experiments. , 1998, Biometrics.

[10]  D. Clayton A model for association in bivariate life tables and its application in epidemiological studies of familial tendency in chronic disease incidence , 1978 .

[11]  Daniel J Sargent,et al.  End points for colon cancer adjuvant trials: observations and recommendations based on individual patient data from 20,898 patients enrolled onto 18 randomized trials from the ACCENT Group. , 2007, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[12]  D. Sargent,et al.  Meta-analysis for the evaluation of surrogate endpoints in cancer clinical trials , 2009, International Journal of Clinical Oncology.

[13]  D. Sargent,et al.  Surrogate endpoint validation: statistical elegance versus clinical relevance , 2008, Statistical methods in medical research.

[14]  D K Smith,et al.  Numerical Optimization , 2001, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[15]  Geert Molenberghs,et al.  Statistical challenges in the evaluation of surrogate endpoints in randomized trials. , 2002, Controlled clinical trials.

[16]  G. Molenberghs,et al.  Validation of surrogate end points in multiple randomized clinical trials with failure time end points , 2001 .