治疗异质性和个体质的相互作用。

IF 1.8 4区 数学 Q1 STATISTICS & PROBABILITY
American Statistician Pub Date : 2012-01-01 Epub Date: 2012-06-12 DOI:10.1080/00031305.2012.671724
Robert S Poulson, Gary L Gadbury, David B Allison
{"title":"治疗异质性和个体质的相互作用。","authors":"Robert S Poulson,&nbsp;Gary L Gadbury,&nbsp;David B Allison","doi":"10.1080/00031305.2012.671724","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Plausibility of high variability in treatment effects across individuals has been recognized as an important consideration in clinical studies. Surprisingly, little attention has been given to evaluating this variability in design of clinical trials or analyses of resulting data. High variation in a treatment's efficacy or safety across individuals (referred to herein as treatment heterogeneity) may have important consequences because the optimal treatment choice for an individual may be different from that suggested by a study of average effects. We call this an individual qualitative interaction (IQI), borrowing terminology from earlier work - referring to a qualitative interaction (QI) being present when the optimal treatment varies across a\"groups\" of individuals. At least three techniques have been proposed to investigate treatment heterogeneity: techniques to detect a QI, use of measures such as the density overlap of two outcome variables under different treatments, and use of cross-over designs to observe \"individual effects.\" We elucidate underlying connections among them, their limitations and some assumptions that may be required. We do so under a potential outcomes framework that can add insights to results from usual data analyses and to study design features that improve the capability to more directly assess treatment heterogeneity.</p>","PeriodicalId":50801,"journal":{"name":"American Statistician","volume":"66 1","pages":"16-24"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2012-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00031305.2012.671724","citationCount":"30","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Treatment Heterogeneity and Individual Qualitative Interaction.\",\"authors\":\"Robert S Poulson,&nbsp;Gary L Gadbury,&nbsp;David B Allison\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00031305.2012.671724\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Plausibility of high variability in treatment effects across individuals has been recognized as an important consideration in clinical studies. Surprisingly, little attention has been given to evaluating this variability in design of clinical trials or analyses of resulting data. High variation in a treatment's efficacy or safety across individuals (referred to herein as treatment heterogeneity) may have important consequences because the optimal treatment choice for an individual may be different from that suggested by a study of average effects. We call this an individual qualitative interaction (IQI), borrowing terminology from earlier work - referring to a qualitative interaction (QI) being present when the optimal treatment varies across a\\\"groups\\\" of individuals. At least three techniques have been proposed to investigate treatment heterogeneity: techniques to detect a QI, use of measures such as the density overlap of two outcome variables under different treatments, and use of cross-over designs to observe \\\"individual effects.\\\" We elucidate underlying connections among them, their limitations and some assumptions that may be required. We do so under a potential outcomes framework that can add insights to results from usual data analyses and to study design features that improve the capability to more directly assess treatment heterogeneity.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50801,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Statistician\",\"volume\":\"66 1\",\"pages\":\"16-24\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2012-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00031305.2012.671724\",\"citationCount\":\"30\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Statistician\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"100\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00031305.2012.671724\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"数学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2012/6/12 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"STATISTICS & PROBABILITY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Statistician","FirstCategoryId":"100","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00031305.2012.671724","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"数学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2012/6/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"STATISTICS & PROBABILITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 30

摘要

个体间治疗效果的高变异性的合理性已被认为是临床研究中的一个重要考虑因素。令人惊讶的是,很少有人注意到在临床试验设计或结果数据分析中评估这种可变性。个体间治疗有效性或安全性的高度差异(此处称为治疗异质性)可能会产生重要后果,因为个体的最佳治疗选择可能不同于平均效果研究所建议的治疗选择。我们将其称为个体定性交互作用(IQI),借用早期工作中的术语——指的是当最佳治疗在个体“群体”中发生变化时,存在的定性交互作用(QI)。至少提出了三种技术来调查治疗异质性:检测QI的技术,使用不同治疗下两个结果变量的密度重叠等测量方法,以及使用交叉设计来观察“个体效应”。我们阐明了它们之间的潜在联系,它们的局限性和一些可能需要的假设。我们这样做是在一个潜在的结果框架下进行的,该框架可以增加对常规数据分析结果的见解,并研究设计特征,从而提高更直接评估治疗异质性的能力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Treatment Heterogeneity and Individual Qualitative Interaction.

Plausibility of high variability in treatment effects across individuals has been recognized as an important consideration in clinical studies. Surprisingly, little attention has been given to evaluating this variability in design of clinical trials or analyses of resulting data. High variation in a treatment's efficacy or safety across individuals (referred to herein as treatment heterogeneity) may have important consequences because the optimal treatment choice for an individual may be different from that suggested by a study of average effects. We call this an individual qualitative interaction (IQI), borrowing terminology from earlier work - referring to a qualitative interaction (QI) being present when the optimal treatment varies across a"groups" of individuals. At least three techniques have been proposed to investigate treatment heterogeneity: techniques to detect a QI, use of measures such as the density overlap of two outcome variables under different treatments, and use of cross-over designs to observe "individual effects." We elucidate underlying connections among them, their limitations and some assumptions that may be required. We do so under a potential outcomes framework that can add insights to results from usual data analyses and to study design features that improve the capability to more directly assess treatment heterogeneity.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
American Statistician
American Statistician 数学-统计学与概率论
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
5.60%
发文量
64
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Are you looking for general-interest articles about current national and international statistical problems and programs; interesting and fun articles of a general nature about statistics and its applications; or the teaching of statistics? Then you are looking for The American Statistician (TAS), published quarterly by the American Statistical Association. TAS contains timely articles organized into the following sections: Statistical Practice, General, Teacher''s Corner, History Corner, Interdisciplinary, Statistical Computing and Graphics, Reviews of Books and Teaching Materials, and Letters to the Editor.
×
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