arXiv ScienceSearch

arXiv · 2502.08443

Tutorial for Surrogate Endpoint Validation Using Joint modeling and Mediation Analysis

Abstract

The use of valid surrogate endpoints is an important stake in clinical research to help reduce both the duration and cost of a clinical trial and speed up the evaluation of interesting treatments. Several methods have been proposed in the statistical literature to validate putative surrogate endpoints. Two main approaches have been proposed: the meta-analytic approach and the mediation analysis approach. The former uses data from meta-analyses to derive associations measures between the surrogate and the final endpoint at the individual and trial levels. The latter rather uses the proportion of the treatment effect on the final endpoint through the surrogate as a measure of surrogacy in a causal inference framework. Both approaches have remained separated as the meta-analytic approach does not estimate the treatment effect on the final endpoint through the surrogate while the mediation analysis approach have been limited to single-trial setting. However, these two approaches are complementary. In this work we propose an approach that combines the meta-analytic and mediation analysis approaches using joint modeling for surrogate validation. We focus on the cases where the final endpoint is a time-to-event endpoint (such as time-to-death) and the surrogate is either a time-to-event or a longitudinal biomarker. Two new joint models were proposed depending on the nature of the surrogate. These model are implemented in the R package frailtypack. We illustrate the developed approaches in three applications on real datasets in oncology.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Quentin Le Coent, Virginie Rondeau, Catherine Legrand. 2025-02-12. Tutorial for Surrogate Endpoint Validation Using Joint modeling and Mediation Analysis. https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.08443

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