arXiv subjects

Andrew C. Hooker

Publications and source records attributed to Andrew C. Hooker.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2024

Methods for non-proportional hazards in clinical trials: A systematic review

For the analysis of time-to-event data, frequently used methods such as the log-rank test or the Cox proportional hazards model are based on the proportional hazards assumption, which is often debatable. Although a wide range of parametric and non-parametric methods for non-proportional hazards (NPH) has been proposed, there is no consensus on the best approaches. To close this gap, we conducted a systematic literature search to identify statistical methods and software appropriate under NPH. Our literature search identified 907 abstracts, out of which we included 211 articles, mostly methodological ones. Review articles and applications were less frequently identified. The articles discuss effect measures, effect estimation and regression approaches, hypothesis tests, and sample size calculation approaches, which are often tailored to specific NPH situations. Using a unified notation, we provide an overview of methods available. Furthermore, we derive some guidance from the identified articles. We summarized the contents from the literature review in a concise way in the main text and provide more detailed explanations in the supplement.

stat.ME↗

arXiv2023

A neutral comparison of statistical methods for time-to-event analyses under non-proportional hazards

While well-established methods for time-to-event data are available when the proportional hazards assumption holds, there is no consensus on the best inferential approach under non-proportional hazards (NPH). However, a wide range of parametric and non-parametric methods for testing and estimation in this scenario have been proposed. To provide recommendations on the statistical analysis of clinical trials where non proportional hazards are expected, we conducted a comprehensive simulation study under different scenarios of non-proportional hazards, including delayed onset of treatment effect, crossing hazard curves, subgroups with different treatment effect and changing hazards after disease progression. We assessed type I error rate control, power and confidence interval coverage, where applicable, for a wide range of methods including weighted log-rank tests, the MaxCombo test, summary measures such as the restricted mean survival time (RMST), average hazard ratios, and milestone survival probabilities as well as accelerated failure time regression models. We found a trade-off between interpretability and power when choosing an analysis strategy under NPH scenarios. While analysis methods based on weighted logrank tests typically were favorable in terms of power, they do not provide an easily interpretable treatment effect estimate. Also, depending on the weight function, they test a narrow null hypothesis of equal hazard functions and rejection of this null hypothesis may not allow for a direct conclusion of treatment benefit in terms of the survival function. In contrast, non-parametric procedures based on well interpretable measures as the RMST difference had lower power in most scenarios. Model based methods based on specific survival distributions had larger power, however often gave biased estimates and lower than nominal confidence interval coverage.

stat.ME↗

arXiv2015

PopED lite: an optimal design software for preclinical pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic studies

Optimal experimental design approaches are seldom used in pre-clinical drug discovery. Main reasons for this lack of use are that available software tools require relatively high insight in optimal design theory, and that the design-execution cycle of in vivo experiments is short, making time-consuming optimizations infeasible. We present the publicly available software PopED lite in order to increase the use of optimal design in pre-clinical drug discovery. PopED lite is designed to be simple, fast and intuitive. Simple, to give many users access to basic optimal design calculations. Fast, to fit the short design-execution cycle and allow interactive experimental design (test one design, discuss proposed design, test another design, etc). Intuitive, so that the input to and output from the software can easily be understood by users without knowledge of the theory of optimal design. In this way, PopED lite is highly useful in practice and complements existing tools. Key functionality of PopED lite is demonstrated by three case studies from real drug discovery projects.

q-bio.QM↗