The intermediate endpoint effect in logistic and probit regression

Background An intermediate endpoint is hypothesized to be in the middle of the causal sequence relating an independent variable to a dependent variable. The intermediate variable is also called a surrogate or mediating variable and the corresponding effect is called the mediated, surrogate endpoint, or intermediate endpoint effect. Clinical studies are often designed to change an intermediate or surrogate endpoint and through this intermediate change influence the ultimate endpoint. In many intermediate endpoint clinical studies the dependent variable is binary, and logistic or probit regression is used. Purpose The purpose of this study is to describe a limitation of a widely used approach to assessing intermediate endpoint effects and to propose an alternative method, based on products of coefficients, that yields more accurate results. Methods The intermediate endpoint model for a binary outcome is described for a true binary outcome and for a dichotomization of a latent continuous outcome. Plots of true values and a simulation study are used to evaluate the different methods. Results Distorted estimates of the intermediate endpoint effect and incorrect conclusions can result from the application of widely used methods to assess the intermediate endpoint effect. The same problem occurs for the proportion of an effect explained by an intermediate endpoint, which has been suggested as a useful measure for identifying intermediate endpoints. A solution to this problem is given based on the relationship between latent variable modeling and logistic or probit regression. Limitations More complicated intermediate variable models are not addressed in the study, although the methods described in the article can be extended to these more complicated models. Conclusions Researchers are encouraged to use an intermediate endpoint method based on the product of regression coefficients. A common method based on difference in coefficient methods can lead to distorted conclusions regarding the intermediate effect. Clinical Trials 2007; 4: 499—513. http://ctj.sagepub.com

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

[2]  Eric R. Ziegel,et al.  Generalized Linear Models , 2002, Technometrics.

[3]  S. West,et al.  A comparison of methods to test mediation and other intervening variable effects. , 2002, Psychological methods.

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

[5]  Ana Ivelisse Avilés,et al.  Linear Mixed Models for Longitudinal Data , 2001, Technometrics.

[6]  Laurence S. Freedman,et al.  Confidence intervals and statistical power of the ‘Validation’ ratio for surrogate or intermediate endpoints , 2001 .

[7]  G. Botvin.  Preventing drug abuse in schools: social and competence enhancement approaches targeting individual-level etiologic factors. , 2000, Addictive behaviors.

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

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

[10]  C. Begg,et al.  On the use of surrogate end points in randomized trials , 2000 .

[11]  D P MacKinnon,et al.  Multilevel Mediation Modeling in Group-Based Intervention Studies , 1999, Evaluation review.

[12]  P. Flandre,et al.  Estimating the proportion of treatment effect explained by a surrogate marker by D. Y. Lin, T. R. Fleming and V. De Gruttola, Statistics in Medicine, 16, 1515–1527 (1997) , 1999 .

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

[14]  N. Draper,et al.  Applied Regression Analysis: Draper/Applied Regression Analysis , 1998 .

[15]  D. A. Kenny,et al.  Data analysis in social psychology. , 1998 .

[16]  G. Koch,et al.  An evaluation of Safe Dates, an adolescent dating violence prevention program. , 1998, American journal of public health.

[17]  D. DeMets,et al.  Surrogate End Points in Clinical Trials: Are We Being Misled? , 1996, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[18]  D. Mackinnon,et al.  A Simulation Study of Mediated Effect Measures. , 1995, Multivariate behavioral research.

[19]  D. Mackinnon,et al.  Estimating Mediated Effects in Prevention Studies , 1993 .

[20]  L S Freedman,et al.  Sample size for studying intermediate endpoints within intervention trails or observational studies. , 1992, American journal of epidemiology.

[21]  B. Graubard,et al.  Statistical validation of intermediate endpoints for chronic diseases. , 1992, Statistics in medicine.

[22]  M Susser,et al.  What is a cause and how do we know one? A grammar for pragmatic epidemiology. , 1991, American journal of epidemiology.

[23]  D. Hosmer,et al.  Applied Logistic Regression , 1991 .

[24]  D. Mackinnon,et al.  A multicommunity trial for primary prevention of adolescent drug abuse. Effects on drug use prevalence. , 1989, JAMA.

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

[26]  Statistical and mathematical modeling of the AIDS epidemic. Papers from a conference. Baltimore, Maryland, 17-18 November, 1987. , 1989, Statistics in medicine.

[27]  P. Albert,et al.  Models for longitudinal data: a generalized estimating equation approach. , 1988, Biometrics.

[28]  M. Criqui,et al.  Lipoproteins as mediators for the effects of alcohol consumption and cigarette smoking on cardiovascular mortality: results form the Lipid Research Clinics Follow-up Study. , 1987, American journal of epidemiology.

[29]  D. A. Kenny,et al.  The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. , 1986, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[30]  M. Sobel.  Asymptotic Confidence Intervals for Indirect Effects in Structural Equation Models , 1982 .

[31]  M. Susser.  Causal Thinking in the Health Sciences: Concepts and Strategies in Epidemiology , 1973 .

[32]  D. M. Ellis,et al.  Applied Regression Analysis , 1968 .

[33]  F. M. Wadley.  Probit Analysis: a Statistical Treatment of the Sigmoid Response Curve , 1952 .

[34]  S. Fiske,et al.  The Handbook of Social Psychology , 1935 .