Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35189671›Full record

ArticleStatistics in medicine2022

Estimation of the proportion of treatment effect explained by a high-dimensional surrogate.

Ruixuan Rachel Zhou, Sihai Dave Zhao, Layla Parast

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Statistics in medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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.

Ruixuan Rachel ZhouWaymo LLC, Mountain View, California, USA.
Sihai Dave ZhaoDepartment of Statistics, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, Illinois, USA.
Layla ParastDepartment of Statistics and Data Sciences, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7288-1009

Funding

Scientific & Technical CoreP2CHD042849 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN · PI MARK D. HAYWARD · 2017 to 2026
$5.2M
Robust Statistical Methods to Identify and Use Surrogate Markers in DiabetesR01DK118354 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN · PI PARAST, LAYLA · 2018 to 2025
$2.0M
NICHD NIH HHS P2C HD042849NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK118354
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Clinical studies examining the effectiveness of a treatment with respect to some primary outcome often require long-term follow-up of patients and/or costly or burdensome measurements of the primary outcome of interest. Identifying a surrogate marker for the primary outcome of interest may allow one to evaluate a treatment effect with less follow-up time, less cost, or less burden. While much clinical and statistical work has focused on identifying and validating surrogate markers, available approaches tend to focus on settings in which only a single surrogate marker is of interest. Limited work has been done to accommodate the high-dimensional surrogate marker setting where the number of potential surrogates is greater than the sample size. In this article, we develop methods to estimate the proportion of treatment effect explained by high-dimensional surrogates. We study the asymptotic properties of our proposed estimator, propose inference procedures, and examine finite sample performance via a simulation study. We illustrate our proposed methods using data from a randomized study comparing a novel whey-based oral nutrition supplement with a standard supplement with respect to change in body fat percentage over 12 weeks, where the surrogate markers of interest are gene expression probesets.

Indexed as

Computer SimulationBiomarkersHumansBiomarkersclinical trialshigh-dimensionalsurrogate markertreatment effect

Identifiers

PMID35189671
PMCPMC9534581

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.