Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38003875›Full record

ArticleJournal of personalized medicine2023

Bayesian Sequential Design for Identifying and Ranking Effective Patient Subgroups in Precision Medicine in the Case of Counting Outcome Data with Inflated Zeros.

Valentin Vinnat, Djillali Annane, Sylvie Chevret

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of personalized medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Valentin VinnatECSTRRA Team, INSERM U1153, Université Paris Cité, 75010 Paris, France.ORCID 0000-0003-4324-5721
Djillali AnnaneIntensive Care Unit, Raymond Poincaré Hospital, 78266 Garches, France.ORCID 0000-0001-6805-8944
Sylvie ChevretECSTRRA Team, INSERM U1153, Université Paris Cité, 75010 Paris, France.

Funding

iRECORDS project, funded by ERA PerMed (JTC_2021) to DA (ANR-21-PERM-0005)Programme d'Investissements d'Avenir (PIA) ANR-18-RHUS-0004
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Precision medicine is revolutionizing health care, particularly by addressing patient variability due to different biological profiles. As traditional treatments may not always be appropriate for certain patient subsets, the rise of biomarker-stratified clinical trials has driven the need for innovative methods. We introduced a Bayesian sequential scheme to evaluate therapeutic interventions in an intensive care unit setting, focusing on complex endpoints characterized by an excess of zeros and right truncation. By using a zero-inflated truncated Poisson model, we efficiently addressed this data complexity. The posterior distribution of rankings and the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) approach provided a comprehensive ranking of the subgroups studied. Different subsets of subgroups were evaluated depending on the availability of biomarker data. Interim analyses, accounting for early stopping for efficacy, were an integral aspect of our design. The simulation study demonstrated a high proportion of correct identification of the subgroup which is the most predictive of the treatment effect, as well as satisfactory false positive and true positive rates. As the role of personalized medicine grows, especially in the intensive care setting, it is critical to have designs that can manage complicated endpoints and that can control for decision error. Our method seems promising in this challenging context.

Indexed as

Bayesian inferencebiomarkersidentification of subsetpersonalized medicine

Identifiers

PMID38003875
PMCPMC10672716

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.