SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2412.09786

A class of nonparametric methods for evaluating the effect of continuous treatments on survival outcomes

Abstract

In randomized trials and observational studies, it is often necessary to evaluate the extent to which an intervention affects a time-to-event outcome, which is only partially observed due to right censoring. For instance, in infectious disease studies, it is frequently of interest to characterize the relationship between risk of acquisition of infection with a pathogen and a biomarker previously measuring for an immune response against that pathogen induced by prior infection and/or vaccination. It is common to conduct inference within a causal framework, wherein we desire to make inferences about the counterfactual probability of survival through a given time point, at any given exposure level. To determine whether a causal effect is present, one can assess if this quantity differs by exposure level. Recent work shows that, under typical causal assumptions, summaries of the counterfactual survival distribution are identifiable. Moreover, when the treatment is multi-level, these summaries are also pathwise differentiable in a nonparametric probability model, making it possible to construct estimators thereof that are unbiased and approximately normal. In cases where the treatment is continuous, the target estimand is no longer pathwise differentiable, rendering it difficult to construct well-behaved estimators without strong parametric assumptions. In this work, we extend beyond the traditional setting with multilevel interventions to develop approaches to nonparametric inference with a continuous exposure. We introduce methods for testing whether the counterfactual probability of survival time by a given time-point remains constant across the range of the continuous exposure levels. The performance of our proposed methods is evaluated via numerical studies, and we apply our method to data from a recent pair of efficacy trials of an HIV monoclonal antibody.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Yutong Jin, Peter B. Gilbert, Aaron Hudson. 2024-12-13. A class of nonparametric methods for evaluating the effect of continuous treatments on survival outcomes. https://arxiv.org/abs/2412.09786

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