On the relationship between the causal‐inference and meta‐analytic paradigms for the validation of surrogate endpoints

The increasing cost of drug development has raised the demand for surrogate endpoints when evaluating new drugs in clinical trials. However, over the years, it has become clear that surrogate endpoints need to be statistically evaluated and deemed valid, before they can be used as substitutes of "true" endpoints in clinical studies. Nowadays, two paradigms, based on causal-inference and meta-analysis, dominate the scene. Nonetheless, although the literature emanating from these paradigms is wide, till now the relationship between them has largely been left unexplored. In the present work, we discuss the conceptual framework underlying both approaches and study the relationship between them using theoretical elements and the analysis of a real case study. Furthermore, we show that the meta-analytic approach can be embedded within a causal-inference framework on the one hand and that it can be heuristically justified why surrogate endpoints successfully evaluated using this approach will often be appealing from a causal-inference perspective as well, on the other. A newly developed and user friendly R package Surrogate is provided to carry out the evaluation exercise.

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

[2]  Rodolphe Thiébaut,et al.  Counterfactual Links to the Proportion of Treatment Effect Explained by a Surrogate Marker , 2005, Biometrics.

[3]  Michael G Hudgens,et al.  Evaluating Candidate Principal Surrogate Endpoints , 2008, Biometrics.

[4]  Geert Molenberghs,et al.  Choice of units of analysis and modeling strategies in multilevel hierarchical models , 2004, Comput. Stat. Data Anal..

[5]  V De Gruttola,et al.  Estimating the proportion of treatment effect explained by a surrogate marker. , 1997, Statistics in medicine.

[6]  Tom Greene,et al.  Related Causal Frameworks for Surrogate Outcomes , 2009, Biometrics.

[7]  E. Moodie,et al.  Targeted maximum likelihood estimation for marginal time-dependent treatment effects under density misspecification. , 2013, Biostatistics.

[8]  Joseph W Hogan,et al.  Bayesian Inference for the Causal Effect of Mediation , 2012, Biometrics.

[9]  D. Rubin,et al.  Principal Stratification in Causal Inference , 2002, Biometrics.

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

[11]  R J Carroll,et al.  On meta-analytic assessment of surrogate outcomes. , 2000, Biostatistics.

[12]  Geert Molenberghs,et al.  Simplified hierarchical linear models for the evaluation of surrogate endpoints , 2003 .

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

[14]  P.T.V.M. de Jong,et al.  Interferon alfa-2a is ineffective for patients with choroidal neovascularization secondary to age-related macular degeneration , 1997 .

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

[16]  Jeremy MG Taylor,et al.  Causal assessment of surrogacy in a meta-analysis of colorectal cancer trials. , 2011, Biostatistics.

[17]  C. Glymour,et al.  STATISTICS AND CAUSAL INFERENCE , 1985 .

[18]  Michael R Elliott,et al.  A Bayesian Approach to Surrogacy Assessment Using Principal Stratification in Clinical Trials , 2010, Biometrics.

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

[20]  Tyler J Vanderweele,et al.  Surrogate Measures and Consistent Surrogates , 2013, Biometrics.

[21]  Jeremy MG Taylor,et al.  Surrogacy assessment using principal stratification when surrogate and outcome measures are multivariate normal. , 2014, Biostatistics.