SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2309.14256

A Weighted Prognostic Covariate Adjustment Method for Efficient and Powerful Treatment Effect Inferences in Randomized Controlled Trials

Abstract

A crucial task for a randomized controlled trial (RCT) is to specify a statistical method that can yield an efficient estimator and powerful test for the treatment effect. A novel and effective strategy to obtain efficient and powerful treatment effect inferences is to incorporate predictions from generative artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms into covariate adjustment for the regression analysis of a RCT. Training a generative AI algorithm on historical control data enables one to construct a digital twin generator (DTG) for RCT participants, which utilizes a participant's baseline covariates to generate a probability distribution for their potential control outcome. Summaries of the probability distribution from the DTG are highly predictive of the trial outcome, and adjusting for these features via regression can thus improve the quality of treatment effect inferences, while satisfying regulatory guidelines on statistical analyses, for a RCT. However, a critical assumption in this strategy is homoskedasticity, or constant variance of the outcome conditional on the covariates. In the case of heteroskedasticity, existing covariate adjustment methods yield inefficient estimators and underpowered tests. We propose to address heteroskedasticity via a weighted prognostic covariate adjustment methodology (Weighted PROCOVA) that adjusts for both the mean and variance of the regression model using information obtained from the DTG. We prove that our method yields unbiased treatment effect estimators, and demonstrate via comprehensive simulation studies and case studies from Alzheimer's disease that it can reduce the variance of the treatment effect estimator, maintain the Type I error rate, and increase the power of the test for the treatment effect from 80% to 85%~90% when the variances from the DTG can explain 5%~10% of the variation in the RCT participants' outcomes.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Alyssa M. Vanderbeek, Anna A. Vidovszky, Jessica L. Ross, Arman Sabbaghi, Jonathan R. Walsh, Charles K. Fisher, the Critical Path for Alzheimer's Disease, the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative, the European Prevention of Alzheimer's Disease, Consortium, the Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study. 2023-09-25. A Weighted Prognostic Covariate Adjustment Method for Efficient and Powerful Treatment Effect Inferences in Randomized Controlled Trials. https://arxiv.org/abs/2309.14256

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

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

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

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