Validation of surrogate markers in multiple randomized clinical trials with repeated measurements: canonical correlation approach.

Summary. Part of the recent literature on the evaluation of biomarkers as surrogate endpoints starts from a multitrial context, which leads to a definition of validity in terms of the quality of both trial-level and individual-level association between the surrogate and true endpoints (Buyse et al., 2000, Biostatistics1, 49-67). These authors concentrated on cross-sectional continuous responses. However, in many randomized clinical studies, repeated measurements are encountered on either or both endpoints. A challenge in this setting is the formulation of a simple and meaningful concept of "surrogacy."Alonso et al. (2003, Biometrical Journal45, 931-945) proposed the variance reduction factor (VRF) to evaluate surrogacy at the individual level. They also showed how and when this concept should be extended to study surrogacy at the trial level. Here, we approach the problem from the natural canonical correlation perspective. We define a class of canonical correlation functions that can be used to study surrogacy at the trial and individual level. We show that the VRF and the R(2) measure defined by Buyse et al. (2000) follow as special cases. Simulations are conducted to evaluate the performance of different members of this family. The methodology is illustrated on data from a meta-analysis of five clinical trials comparing antipsychotic agents for the treatment of chronic schizophrenia.

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

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

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

[4]  Helena Geys Pseudo-likelihood methods and generalized estimating equations: efficient estimation techniques for the analysis of correlated multivariate data , 1999 .

[5]  R. Drake,et al.  Causes and consequences of duration of untreated psychosis in schizophrenia. , 2000, The British journal of psychiatry : the journal of mental science.

[6]  J. Collet,et al.  Surrogate endpoints: A basis for a rational approach , 2006, European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology.

[7]  Steven G. Gilmour,et al.  The analysis of designed experiments and longitudinal data by using smoothing splines - Discussion , 1999 .

[8]  John P. A. Ioannidis,et al.  NIAID Workshop, Memphis, Tennessee, 25-26 March 1997: Statistical issues for HIV surrogate endpoints: Point/counterpoint , 1998 .

[9]  Geert Molenberghs,et al.  Validation of Surrogate Markers in Multiple Randomized Clinical Trials with Repeated Measurements , 2003, Biometrics.

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

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

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

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

[14]  C. Caley,et al.  Ziprasidone: The Fifth Atypical Antipsychotic , 2002, The Annals of pharmacotherapy.

[15]  M. Kenward,et al.  The Analysis of Designed Experiments and Longitudinal Data by Using Smoothing Splines , 1999 .

[16]  Andrzej T. Galecki,et al.  General class of covariance structures for two or more repeated factors in longitudinal data analysis , 1994 .

[17]  J. Mullen,et al.  A Random-Assignment, Double-Blind, Clinical Trial of Once- vs Twice-Daily Administration of Quetiapine Fumarate in Patients with Schizophrenia or Schizoaffective Disorder: A Pilot Study , 2003, Canadian journal of psychiatry. Revue canadienne de psychiatrie.

[18]  Geert Molenberghs,et al.  Validation of Surrogate Endpoints in Multiple Randomized Clinical Trials with Discrete Outcomes , 2002 .

[19]  Geert Molenberghs,et al.  INVESTIGATING THE CRITERION VALIDITY OF PSYCHIATRIC SYMPTOM SCALES USING SURROGATE MARKER VALIDATION METHODOLOGY , 2002, Journal of biopharmaceutical statistics.

[20]  G. Molenberghs,et al.  Applying linear mixed models to estimate reliability in clinical trial data with repeated measurements. , 2004, Controlled clinical trials.

[21]  J M Taylor,et al.  Statistical issues for HIV surrogate endpoints: point/counterpoint. An NIAID workshop. , 1998, Statistics in medicine.

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

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

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