A perfect correlate does not a surrogate make

被引:107
作者
Stuart G Baker
Barnett S Kramer
机构
[1] Biometry Research Group, Division of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute
[2] Office of Disease Prevention, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD
关键词
Adenoma; Hormone Replacement Therapy; Finasteride; Surrogate Endpoint; True Outcome;
D O I
10.1186/1471-2288-3-16
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Background: There is common belief among some medical researchers that if a potential surrogate endpoint is highly correlated with a true endpoint, then a positive (or negative) difference in potential surrogate endpoints between randomization groups would imply a positive (or negative) difference in unobserved true endpoints between randomization groups. We investigate this belief when the potential surrogate and unobserved true endpoints are perfectly correlated within each randomization group. Methods: We use a graphical approach. The vertical axis is the unobserved true endpoint and the horizontal axis is the potential surrogate endpoint. Perfect correlation within each randomization group implies that, for each randomization group, potential surrogate and true endpoints are related by a straight line. In this scenario the investigator does not know the slopes or intercepts. We consider a plausible example where the slope of the line is higher for the experimental group than for the control group. Results: In our example with unknown lines, a decrease in mean potential surrogate endpoints from control to experimental groups corresponds to an increase in mean true endpoint from control to experimental groups. Thus the potential surrogate endpoints give the wrong inference. Similar results hold for binary potential surrogate and true outcomes (although the notion of correlation does not apply). The potential surrogate endpointwould give the correct inference if either (i) the unknown lines for the two group coincided, which means that the distribution of true endpoint conditional on potential surrogate endpoint does not depend on treatment group, which is called the Prentice Criterion or (ii) if one could accurately predict the lines based on data from prior studies. Conclusion: Perfect correlation between potential surrogate and unobserved true outcomes within randomized groups does not guarantee correct inference based on a potential surrogate endpoint. Even in early phase trials, investigators should not base conclusions on potential surrogate endpoints in which the only validation is high correlation with the true endpoint within a group.
引用
收藏
页码:1 / 5
页数:4
相关论文
共 15 条
  • [1] Fleming T.R., DeMets D.L., Surrogate end points in clinical trials: Are we being misled?, Annals of Internal Medicine, 125, pp. 605-613, (1996)
  • [2] Biomarkers and surrogate endpoints: Preferred definitions and conceptual framework, Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, 69, pp. 89-95, (2001)
  • [3] Risks and benefits of estrogen plus progestin in healthy postmenopausal women: Principal results from the Women's Health Initiative Randomized Controlled Trial, Journal of the American Medical Association, 288, pp. 2321-2333, (2002)
  • [4] Sandier R.S., Halabi S., Baron J.A., Budinger S., Paskett E., Keresztes R., Petrelli N., Pipas J.M., Karp D.D., Loprinzi C.L., Steinbach G., Schilsky R., A randomized trial of aspirin to prevent colorectal adenomas in patients with previous colorectal cancer, New England Journal of Medicine, 348, pp. 883-890, (2003)
  • [5] Baron J.A., Cole B.F., Sandier R.S., Haile R.W., Ahnen D., Bresalier R., McKeown-Eyssen G., Summers R.W., Rothstein R., Burke C.A., Snover D.C., Church T.R., Allen J.I., Beach M., Beck G.J., Bond J.H., Byers T., Greenberg E.R., Mandel J.S., Marcon N., Mott L.A., Pearson L., Saibil F., Van Stolk R.U., A randomized trial of aspirin to prevent colorectal adenomas, New England Journal of Medicine, 348, pp. 891-899, (2003)
  • [6] Imperiale T.F., Aspirin and the prevention of colorectal cancer, New England Journal of Medicine, 348, pp. 879-880, (2003)
  • [7] Levin B., Potential pitfalls in the use of surrogate endpoints in colorectal adenoma chemoprevention, Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 95, pp. 697-698, (2003)
  • [8] Schatzkin A., Gail M., The promise and peril of surrogate endpoints in cancer research, Nature Reviews Cancer, 2, pp. 1-9, (2002)
  • [9] Thompson I.M., Goodman P.J., Tangen C.M., Lucia M.S., Miller G.J., Ford L.G., Lieber M.M., Cespedes R.D., Atkins J.N., Lippman S.M., Carlin S.M., Ryan A., Szczepanek C.M., Crowley J.J., Coltman C.A., The influence of finasteride on the development of prostate cancer, New England Journal of Medicine, 349, pp. 215-224, (2003)
  • [10] Prentice R.L., Surrogate endpoints in clinical trials: Definitions and operational criteria, Statistics in Medicine, 8, pp. 431-430, (1989)