Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31270933›Full record

ArticlePharmaceutical statistics2019

A comparison of subgroup identification methods in clinical drug development: Simulation study and regulatory considerations.

Cynthia Huber, Norbert Benda, Tim Friede

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Pharmaceutical statistics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. [Subgroup identification based on an accelerated failure time model combined with adaptive elastic net].Nan fang yi ke da xue xue bao = Journal of Southern Medical University · 2019
    Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Cynthia HuberDepartment of Medical Statistics, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-2035-3682
Norbert BendaDepartment of Medical Statistics, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-5605-2414
Tim FriedeDepartment of Medical Statistics, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-5347-7441

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With advancement of technologies such as genomic sequencing, predictive biomarkers have become a useful tool for the development of personalized medicine. Predictive biomarkers can be used to select subsets of patients, which are most likely to benefit from a treatment. A number of approaches for subgroup identification were proposed over the last years. Although overviews of subgroup identification methods are available, systematic comparisons of their performance in simulation studies are rare. Interaction trees (IT), model-based recursive partitioning, subgroup identification based on differential effect, simultaneous threshold interaction modeling algorithm (STIMA), and adaptive refinement by directed peeling were proposed for subgroup identification. We compared these methods in a simulation study using a structured approach. In order to identify a target population for subsequent trials, a selection of the identified subgroups is needed. Therefore, we propose a subgroup criterion leading to a target subgroup consisting of the identified subgroups with an estimated treatment difference no less than a pre-specified threshold. In our simulation study, we evaluated these methods by considering measures for binary classification, like sensitivity and specificity. In settings with large effects or huge sample sizes, most methods perform well. For more realistic settings in drug development involving data from a single trial only, however, none of the methods seems suitable for selecting a target population. Using the subgroup criterion as alternative to the proposed pruning procedures, STIMA and IT can improve their performance in some settings. The methods and the subgroup criterion are illustrated by an application in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis.

Indexed as

Computer SimulationModels, StatisticalAlgorithmsAmyotrophic Lateral SclerosisBiomarkersData Interpretation, StatisticalDrug DevelopmentHumansPrecision MedicineResearch DesignSample SizeSensitivity and SpecificityBiomarkersdecision treespersonalized medicinepredictive biomarkertreatment-by-subgroup interactions

Identifiers

PMID31270933
PMCPMC6772173

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.