Estimation of the optimal regime in treatment of prostate cancer recurrence from observational data using flexible weighting models

Prostate cancer patients are closely followed after the initial therapy and salvage treatment may be prescribed to prevent or delay cancer recurrence. The salvage treatment decision is usually made dynamically based on the patient's evolving history of disease status and other time-dependent clinical covariates. A multi-center prostate cancer observational study has provided us data on longitudinal prostate specific antigen (PSA) measurements, time-varying salvage treatment, and cancer recurrence time. These data enable us to estimate the best dynamic regime of salvage treatment, while accounting for the complicated confounding of time-varying covariates present in the data. A Random Forest based method is used to model the probability of regime adherence and inverse probability weights are used to account for the complexity of selection bias in regime adherence. The optimal regime is then identified by the largest restricted mean survival time. We conduct simulation studies with different PSA trends to mimic both simple and complex regime adherence mechanisms. The proposed method can efficiently accommodate complex and possibly unknown adherence mechanisms, and it is robust to cases where the proportional hazards assumption is violated. We apply the method to data collected from the observational study and estimate the best salvage treatment regime in managing the risk of prostate cancer recurrence.

[1]  Douglas E Schaubel,et al.  The effect of salvage therapy on survival in a longitudinal study with treatment by indication , 2010, Statistics in medicine.

[2]  Peter Dayan,et al.  Technical Note: Q-Learning , 2004, Machine Learning.

[3]  J. Robins,et al.  Estimation and extrapolation of optimal treatment and testing strategies , 2008, Statistics in medicine.

[4]  J. Robins.  Correcting for non-compliance in randomized trials using structural nested mean models , 1994 .

[5]  J. Roy,et al.  Dynamic marginal structural modeling to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of more or less aggressive treatment intensification strategies in adults with type 2 diabetes , 2012, Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety.

[6]  M. J. van der Laan,et al.  A General Implementation of TMLE for Longitudinal Data Applied to Causal Inference in Survival Analysis , 2012, The international journal of biostatistics.

[7]  C. Watkins.  Learning from delayed rewards , 1989 .

[8]  J. M. Taylor,et al.  Subgroup identification from randomized clinical trial data , 2011, Statistics in medicine.

[9]  S. Murphy,et al.  An experimental design for the development of adaptive treatment strategies , 2005, Statistics in medicine.

[10]  Cécile Proust-Lima,et al.  Determinants of change in prostate-specific antigen over time and its association with recurrence after external beam radiation therapy for prostate cancer in five large cohorts. , 2008, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[11]  Peter Dayan,et al.  Q-learning , 1992, Machine Learning.

[12]  James M. Robins,et al.  Optimal Structural Nested Models for Optimal Sequential Decisions , 2004 .

[13]  Susan A. Murphy,et al.  A-Learning for approximate planning , 2004 .

[14]  Romain Neugebauer,et al.  High‐dimensional propensity score algorithm in comparative effectiveness research with time‐varying interventions , 2015, Statistics in medicine.

[15]  J. Robins.  Analytic Methods for Estimating HIV-Treatment and Cofactor Effects , 2002 .

[16]  S. Murphy,et al.  Methodological Challenges in Constructing Effective Treatment Sequences for Chronic Psychiatric Disorders , 2007, Neuropsychopharmacology.

[17]  Edward H. Kennedy,et al.  Comparison of methods for estimating the effect of salvage therapy in prostate cancer when treatment is given by indication , 2014, Statistics in medicine.

[18]  Jean-Philippe Vert,et al.  Consistency of Random Forests , 2014, 1405.2881.

[19]  Yi Lin,et al.  Random Forests and Adaptive Nearest Neighbors , 2006 .

[20]  Peter F Thall,et al.  Evaluation of Viable Dynamic Treatment Regimes in a Sequentially Randomized Trial of Advanced Prostate Cancer , 2012, Journal of the American Statistical Association.

[21]  S. Murphy,et al.  Optimal dynamic treatment regimes , 2003 .

[22]  Luc Devroye,et al.  On the layered nearest neighbour estimate, the bagged nearest neighbour estimate and the random forest method in regression and classification , 2010, J. Multivar. Anal..

[23]  Romain Neugebauer,et al.  An application of model-fitting procedures for marginal structural models. , 2005, American journal of epidemiology.

[24]  Leo Breiman,et al.  Random Forests , 2001, Machine Learning.

[25]  James M. Robins,et al.  The International Journal of Biostatistics CAUSAL INFERENCE When to Start Treatment ? A Systematic Approach to the Comparison of Dynamic Regimes Using Observational Data , 2011 .

[26]  J. Robins,et al.  Comparison of dynamic treatment regimes via inverse probability weighting. , 2006, Basic & clinical pharmacology & toxicology.

[27]  Patrick J O'Connor,et al.  Super learning to hedge against incorrect inference from arbitrary parametric assumptions in marginal structural modeling. , 2013, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[28]  J. Robins,et al.  Correcting for Noncompliance and Dependent Censoring in an AIDS Clinical Trial with Inverse Probability of Censoring Weighted (IPCW) Log‐Rank Tests , 2000, Biometrics.

[29]  D. Cox.  Regression Models and Life-Tables , 1972 .

[30]  J. Robins.  A new approach to causal inference in mortality studies with a sustained exposure period—application to control of the healthy worker survivor effect , 1986 .