Utility-based Bayesian personalized treatment selection for advanced breast cancer

IF 1 4区 数学 Q3 STATISTICS & PROBABILITY
Juhee Lee, Peter F. Thall, Bora Lim, Pavlos Msaouel
{"title":"Utility-based Bayesian personalized treatment selection for advanced breast cancer","authors":"Juhee Lee,&nbsp;Peter F. Thall,&nbsp;Bora Lim,&nbsp;Pavlos Msaouel","doi":"10.1111/rssc.12582","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>A Bayesian method is proposed for personalized treatment selection in settings where data are available from a randomized clinical trial with two or more outcomes. The motivating application is a randomized trial that compared letrozole plus bevacizumab to letrozole alone as first-line therapy for hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer. The combination treatment arm had larger median progression-free survival time, but also a higher rate of severe toxicities. This suggests that the risk-benefit trade-off between these two outcomes should play a central role in selecting each patient's treatment, particularly since older patients are less likely to tolerate severe toxicities. To quantify the desirability of each possible outcome combination for an individual patient, we elicited from breast cancer oncologists a utility function that varied with age. The utility was used as an explicit criterion for quantifying risk-benefit trade-offs when making personalized treatment selections. A Bayesian nonparametric multivariate regression model with a dependent Dirichlet process prior was fit to the trial data. Under the fitted model, a new patient's treatment can be selected based on the posterior predictive utility distribution. For the breast cancer trial dataset, the optimal treatment depends on the patient's age, with the combination preferable for patients 70 years or younger and the single agent preferable for patients older than 70.</p>","PeriodicalId":49981,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C-Applied Statistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C-Applied Statistics","FirstCategoryId":"100","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/rssc.12582","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"数学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"STATISTICS & PROBABILITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

A Bayesian method is proposed for personalized treatment selection in settings where data are available from a randomized clinical trial with two or more outcomes. The motivating application is a randomized trial that compared letrozole plus bevacizumab to letrozole alone as first-line therapy for hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer. The combination treatment arm had larger median progression-free survival time, but also a higher rate of severe toxicities. This suggests that the risk-benefit trade-off between these two outcomes should play a central role in selecting each patient's treatment, particularly since older patients are less likely to tolerate severe toxicities. To quantify the desirability of each possible outcome combination for an individual patient, we elicited from breast cancer oncologists a utility function that varied with age. The utility was used as an explicit criterion for quantifying risk-benefit trade-offs when making personalized treatment selections. A Bayesian nonparametric multivariate regression model with a dependent Dirichlet process prior was fit to the trial data. Under the fitted model, a new patient's treatment can be selected based on the posterior predictive utility distribution. For the breast cancer trial dataset, the optimal treatment depends on the patient's age, with the combination preferable for patients 70 years or younger and the single agent preferable for patients older than 70.

基于效用的晚期乳腺癌贝叶斯个性化治疗选择
在具有两个或多个结果的随机临床试验中,提出了一种贝叶斯方法,用于个性化治疗选择。激励应用是一项随机试验,比较来曲唑加贝伐单抗与来曲唑单独作为激素受体阳性晚期乳腺癌一线治疗。联合治疗组的中位无进展生存时间更长,但严重毒性发生率也更高。这表明,这两种结果之间的风险-收益权衡应该在选择每个患者的治疗方案时发挥核心作用,特别是因为老年患者不太可能耐受严重的毒性。为了量化每位患者的每种可能结果组合的可取性,我们从乳腺癌肿瘤学家那里获得了一个随年龄变化的效用函数。在做出个性化治疗选择时,效用被用作量化风险-收益权衡的明确标准。对试验数据拟合了一个具有相关Dirichlet过程先验的贝叶斯非参数多元回归模型。在拟合模型下,根据后验预测效用分布选择新患者的治疗方案。对于乳腺癌试验数据集,最佳治疗取决于患者的年龄,70岁或以下的患者优选联合用药,70岁以上的患者优选单药。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
76
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series C (Applied Statistics) is a journal of international repute for statisticians both inside and outside the academic world. The journal is concerned with papers which deal with novel solutions to real life statistical problems by adapting or developing methodology, or by demonstrating the proper application of new or existing statistical methods to them. At their heart therefore the papers in the journal are motivated by examples and statistical data of all kinds. The subject-matter covers the whole range of inter-disciplinary fields, e.g. applications in agriculture, genetics, industry, medicine and the physical sciences, and papers on design issues (e.g. in relation to experiments, surveys or observational studies). A deep understanding of statistical methodology is not necessary to appreciate the content. Although papers describing developments in statistical computing driven by practical examples are within its scope, the journal is not concerned with simply numerical illustrations or simulation studies. The emphasis of Series C is on case-studies of statistical analyses in practice.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信