Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2305.19741

Sensitivity analysis for publication bias on the time-dependent summary ROC analysis in meta-analysis of prognosis studies

Yi Zhou·Ao Huang·Satoshi Hattori
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

In the analysis of prognosis studies with time-to-event outcomes, dichotomization of patients is often made. As the evaluations of prognostic capacity, the survivals of groups with high/low expression of the biomarker are often estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method, and the difference between groups is summarized via the hazard ratio (HR). The high/low expressions are usually determined by study-specific cutoff values, which brings heterogeneity over multiple prognosis studies and difficulty to synthesizing the results in a simple way. In meta-analysis of diagnostic studies with binary outcomes, the summary receiver operating characteristics (SROC) analysis provides a useful cutoff-free summary over studies. Recently, this methodology has been extended to the time-dependent SROC analysis for time-to-event outcomes in meta-analysis of prognosis studies. In this paper, we propose a sensitivity analysis method for evaluating the impact of publication bias on the time-dependent SROC analysis. Our proposal extends the recently introduced sensitivity analysis method for meta-analysis of diagnostic studies based on the bivariate normal model on sensitivity and specificity pairs. To model the selective publication process specific to prognosis studies, we introduce a trivariate model on the time-dependent sensitivity and specificity and the log-transformed HR. Based on the proved asymptotic property of the trivariate model, we introduce a likelihood based sensitivity analysis method based on the conditional likelihood constrained by the expected proportion of published studies. We illustrate the proposed sensitivity analysis method through the meta-analysis of Ki67 for breast cancer. Simulation studies are conducted to evaluate the performance of the proposed method.

Explore related subjects

stat.MEstat.AP

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Yi Zhou, Ao Huang, Satoshi Hattori. 2023-05-31. Sensitivity analysis for publication bias on the time-dependent summary ROC analysis in meta-analysis of prognosis studies. https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.19741

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Surprise Reduction and Nullification in Bayesian and Inverse Bayesian Inference under Ambiguous Prediction-Error Attribution

In non-stationary environments, prediction errors may signal environmental change or transient outliers, and adaptive systems must track such changes without overreacting to outliers. We distinguish surprise reduction, which updates beliefs to fit observations, from surprise nullification, which weakens constraints imposed by the predictive structure, and formalize both within Bayesian and inverse Bayesian (BIB) inference. Belief and likelihood updates are derived from variational objectives sharing a nullification strength, determined endogenously by minimizing surprise under the candidate post-update predictive distribution. In the Gaussian case, nullification expands belief and likelihood variances by a common factor relative to standard Bayesian updating, leaving the ratio unchanged. BIB thus defers attribution of the prediction error, committing to neither latent-state change nor observation-process uncertainty. The nullification strength is carried over as a candidate and is maintained or released according to the predictive surprise of the next observation. In a mean estimation task with outliers and changepoints, no scanned parameter setting of a Sage-Husa-type adaptive Kalman filter, fixed-strength BIB variant, or belief-forgetting-only variant outperforms BIB in both changepoint tracking and post-outlier stability. An oracle-informed reduced Bayesian model tracks changepoints better but is less stable after outliers. Although BIB maintains no explicit hypotheses about changepoints or outliers, it generates event-dependent dynamics. The learning rate increases after changepoints, whereas after outliers, nullification is released, and this increase is suppressed. Deferring attribution and letting subsequent observations differentiate the responses may constitute a principle of adaptive inference in non-stationary environments.

stat.ME↗
arXiv2026

Generalized Ridge Refitting for the Lasso and Prediction Improvement Bounds

We study a class of Lasso based estimators obtained by applying a quadratic correction on the Lasso equicorrelation set. The penalty matrix determines both the magnitude and geometry of the correction and contains, among other cases, the isotropic Lasso--Ridge correction, least squares refitting, Gram proportional interpolation between the Lasso and least squares, and coordinate specific penalties. We first derive a closed form representation and isolate the positive gain component of the resulting prediction improvement. We then control the remaining stochastic linear term in expectation by localizing the random signed equicorrelation model around a deterministic reference support. This yields a finite sample expectation bound that explicitly accounts for the randomness induced by Lasso model selection. The resulting decomposition provides a unified framework for understanding when Lasso based quadratic corrections can improve prediction.

stat.ME↗
arXiv2026

Discretization in covariate-adaptive randomization: gains and losses

Covariate-adaptive randomization(CAR) is widely implemented in clinical trials to balance prognostic covariates across treatment arms. Continuous covariates are often discretized into strata in practice, yet their consequences are not clearly understood. This paper provides a comprehensive study of the impact of discretization on both the CAR design process and the inferential results thereafter. We establish the asymptotic properties of both imbalance measures and treatment effect estimators under discretized and non-discretized settings. Practical recommendations are given on when and how discretization should be employed. We show that discretization in design is generally recommended, as it enhances robustness against model misspecification. However, if the true model is known, the most efficient strategy is to balance covariates according to that model in the design. The theoretical results are corroborated by extensive simulation studies and an empirical application to a diabetes trial dataset. Together, the results clarify the gains and losses of discretization in CAR and pave the way for learning impact of discretization to other designs and beyond.

stat.ME↗