arXiv subjects

Sandra Siegfried

Publications and source records attributed to Sandra Siegfried.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2024

Smooth Transformation Models for Survival Analysis: A Tutorial Using R

Over the last five decades, we have seen strong methodological advances in survival analysis, using parametric methods and, more prominently, methods based on non-/semi-parametric estimation. As the methodological landscape continues to evolve, the task of navigating through the multitude of methods and identifying available software resources is becoming increasingly challenging -- especially in more complex scenarios, such as when dealing with interval-censored or clustered survival data, non-proportional hazards, or dependent censoring. This tutorial explores the potential of using the framework of smooth transformation models for survival analysis in the R system for statistical computing. This framework provides a unified maximum-likelihood approach that covers a wide range of survival models, including well-established ones such as the Weibull model and a fully parametric version of the famous Cox proportional hazards model, and various extensions for more complex scenarios. We explore models for non-proportional/crossing hazards, dependent censoring, clustered observations and extensions towards personalised medicine within this framework. Using survival data from a two-arm randomised controlled trial on rectal cancer therapy, we demonstrate how survival analysis tasks can be seamlessly navigated in R within this framework using the implementation provided by the "tram" package, and few related packages.

stat.ME↗

arXiv2024

Transformation Discriminant Analysis for Constructing Optimal Biomarker Combinations

Accurate diagnostic tests are essential for effective screening and treatment. However, individual biomarkers often fail to provide sufficient diagnostic accuracy, as they typically capture only one aspect of the complex disease process. Combining multiple biomarkers, each capturing a distinct mechanism, can help constructing more informative diagnostic tests. In practice, logistic regression is used as the default to combine biomarkers, but it can perform poorly when biomarker distributions exhibit skewness or differ across disease groups. Nonparametric methods provide more flexibility but generally require large sample sizes that are infrequently available in biomedical research. We propose a novel framework called transformation discriminant analysis which combines biomarkers through the likelihood ratio function to construct theoretically optimal diagnostic scores. Transformation discriminant analysis balances between flexibility and efficiency. It can accommodate a wide range of distributional shapes and disease-specific dependence structures while remaining fully parametric. This allows for likelihood inference and strong performance even in small-sample settings. We evaluate TDA through simulations and benchmark its performance against commonly used methods. Finally, we illustrate its utility in constructing an optimal diagnostic test for hepatocellular carcinoma, a disease with no single ideal biomarker. An open-source R implementation is provided for reproducibility and broader application.

stat.ME↗

arXiv2023

Distribution-Free Location-Scale Regression

We introduce a generalized additive model for location, scale, and shape (GAMLSS) next of kin aiming at distribution-free and parsimonious regression modelling for arbitrary outcomes. We replace the strict parametric distribution formulating such a model by a transformation function, which in turn is estimated from data. Doing so not only makes the model distribution-free but also allows to limit the number of linear or smooth model terms to a pair of location-scale predictor functions. We derive the likelihood for continuous, discrete, and randomly censored observations, along with corresponding score functions. A plethora of existing algorithms is leveraged for model estimation, including constrained maximum-likelihood, the original GAMLSS algorithm, and transformation trees. Parameter interpretability in the resulting models is closely connected to model selection. We propose the application of a novel best subset selection procedure to achieve especially simple ways of interpretation. All techniques are motivated and illustrated by a collection of applications from different domains, including crossing and partial proportional hazards, complex count regression, non-linear ordinal regression, and growth curves. All analyses are reproducible with the help of the "tram" add-on package to the R system for statistical computing and graphics.

stat.ME↗

arXiv2021

On the relevance of prognostic information for clinical trials: A theoretical quantification

The question of how individual patient data from cohort studies or historical clinical trials can be leveraged for designing more powerful, or smaller yet equally powerful, clinical trials becomes increasingly important in the era of digitalisation. Today, the traditional statistical analyses approaches may seem questionable to practitioners in light of ubiquitous historical covariate information. Several methodological developments aim at incorporating historical information in the design and analysis of future clinical trials, most importantly Bayesian information borrowing, propensity score methods, stratification, and covariate adjustment. Recently, adjusting the analysis with respect to a prognostic score, which was obtained from some machine learning procedure applied to historical data, has been suggested and we study the potential of this approach for randomised clinical trials. In an idealised situation of a normal outcome in a two-arm trial with 1:1 allocation, we derive a simple sample size reduction formula as a function of two criteria characterising the prognostic score: (1) The coefficient of determination $R^2$ on historical data and (2) the correlation $ρ$ between the estimated and the true unknown prognostic scores. While maintaining the same power, the original total sample size $n$ planned for the unadjusted analysis reduces to $(1 - R^2 ρ^2) \times n$ in an adjusted analysis. Robustness in less ideal situations was assessed empirically. We conclude that there is potential for substantially more powerful or smaller trials, but only when prognostic scores can be accurately estimated.

stat.ME↗