experiments and dynamic treatment regimes s.a. murphy at niaid, brb december, 2007
Post on 21-Dec-2015
217 views
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Experiments and Dynamic Treatment Regimes S.A. Murphy At NIAID, BRB December, 2007](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032704/56649d6a5503460f94a48c1b/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Experiments and Dynamic Treatment Regimes
S.A. MurphyAt NIAID, BRB December, 2007
![Page 2: Experiments and Dynamic Treatment Regimes S.A. Murphy At NIAID, BRB December, 2007](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032704/56649d6a5503460f94a48c1b/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
2
Outline
• Dynamic Treatment Regimes
• Challenges in Experimentation
• Defining Effects and Aliasing
• Example
![Page 3: Experiments and Dynamic Treatment Regimes S.A. Murphy At NIAID, BRB December, 2007](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032704/56649d6a5503460f94a48c1b/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
3
Dynamic treatment regimes are individually tailored treatments, with treatment type and dosage changing with ongoing subject need. Mimic Clinical Practice.
•High variability across patients in response to any one treatment
•Relapse is likely without either continuous or intermittent treatment for a large proportion of people.
•What works now may not work later
•Exacerbations in disorder may occur if there are no alterations in treatment
![Page 4: Experiments and Dynamic Treatment Regimes S.A. Murphy At NIAID, BRB December, 2007](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032704/56649d6a5503460f94a48c1b/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
4
The Big Questions
•What is the best sequencing of treatments?
•What is the best timings of alterations in treatments?
•What information do we use to make these decisions?
![Page 5: Experiments and Dynamic Treatment Regimes S.A. Murphy At NIAID, BRB December, 2007](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032704/56649d6a5503460f94a48c1b/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
5
Two stages of treatment for each individual
Observation available at jth stage
Treatment (vector) at jth stage
Primary outcome Y is a specified summary of decisions and observations
![Page 6: Experiments and Dynamic Treatment Regimes S.A. Murphy At NIAID, BRB December, 2007](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032704/56649d6a5503460f94a48c1b/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
6
A dynamic treatment regime is a vector of decision rules, one per decision
where each decision rule
inputs the available information
and outputs a recommended treatment decision.
![Page 7: Experiments and Dynamic Treatment Regimes S.A. Murphy At NIAID, BRB December, 2007](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032704/56649d6a5503460f94a48c1b/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
7
Challenges in Experimentation
![Page 8: Experiments and Dynamic Treatment Regimes S.A. Murphy At NIAID, BRB December, 2007](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032704/56649d6a5503460f94a48c1b/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
8
Dynamic Treatment Regimes (review)
Constructing decision rules is a multi-stage decision problem in which the system dynamics are unknown.
High quality data is likely provided by sequential multiple assignment randomized trials: randomize at each decision point— à la full factorial.
![Page 9: Experiments and Dynamic Treatment Regimes S.A. Murphy At NIAID, BRB December, 2007](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032704/56649d6a5503460f94a48c1b/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
9
ExTENd
• Ongoing study at U. Pennsylvania (D. Oslin)
• Goal is to learn how best to help alcohol dependent individuals reduce alcohol consumption.
![Page 10: Experiments and Dynamic Treatment Regimes S.A. Murphy At NIAID, BRB December, 2007](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032704/56649d6a5503460f94a48c1b/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
10
Oslin ExTENd
Late Trigger forNonresponse
8 wks Response
TDM + Naltrexone
CBIRandom
assignment:
CBI +Naltrexone
Nonresponse
Early Trigger for Nonresponse
Randomassignment:
Randomassignment:
Randomassignment:
Naltrexone
8 wks Response
Randomassignment:
CBI +Naltrexone
CBI
TDM + Naltrexone
Naltrexone
Nonresponse
![Page 11: Experiments and Dynamic Treatment Regimes S.A. Murphy At NIAID, BRB December, 2007](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032704/56649d6a5503460f94a48c1b/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
11
Challenges in ExperimentationDynamic Treatment Regimes are multi-component treatments:
many possible components
• decision options for improving patients are often different from decision options for non-improving patients (T2 is a vector and differs by outcomes observed during initial treatment)
• multiple components employed simultaneously
• medications, behavioral therapy, adjunctive treatments, delivery mechanisms, motivational therapy, staff training, monitoring schedule…….
• Future: series of screening/refining, randomized trials prior to confirmatory trial --- à la Fisher/Box
![Page 12: Experiments and Dynamic Treatment Regimes S.A. Murphy At NIAID, BRB December, 2007](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032704/56649d6a5503460f94a48c1b/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
12
Screening experiments (review)1) Goal is to eliminate inactive factors (e.g. components) and
inactive effects.
2) Each factor at 2 levels
3) Screen main effects and some interactions
4) Design experiment using working assumptions concerning the negligibility of certain higher order factorial effects.
5) Designs and analyses permit one to determine aliasing (caused by false working assumptions)
6) Minimize formal assumptions
![Page 13: Experiments and Dynamic Treatment Regimes S.A. Murphy At NIAID, BRB December, 2007](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032704/56649d6a5503460f94a48c1b/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
13
• Stage 1 Factors: T1={A, B, C, D}, each with 2 levels
• Stage 1 outcome:
• Stage 2 Factors: T2= {F2--only if R=1, G2—only if R=0}, each with 2 levels
• Primary Outcome: Y continuous
(26= 64 simple dynamic treatment regimes)
Simple Example for Two Stages
![Page 14: Experiments and Dynamic Treatment Regimes S.A. Murphy At NIAID, BRB December, 2007](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032704/56649d6a5503460f94a48c1b/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
14
Two Stage Design: I=ABCDF2=ABCDG2
A B C D F2=G2
- - - - +
- - - + -
- - + - -
- - + + +
- + - - -
- + - + +
- + + - +
- + + + -
+ - - - -
+ - - + +
+ - + - +
+ - + + -
+ + - - +
+ + - + -
+ + + - -
+ + + + +
![Page 15: Experiments and Dynamic Treatment Regimes S.A. Murphy At NIAID, BRB December, 2007](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032704/56649d6a5503460f94a48c1b/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
15
Screening experiments
Can we:
design screening experiments using working assumptions concerning higher order effects
&
determine the aliasing and provide an analysis method?
![Page 16: Experiments and Dynamic Treatment Regimes S.A. Murphy At NIAID, BRB December, 2007](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032704/56649d6a5503460f94a48c1b/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
16
Defining the Effects
![Page 17: Experiments and Dynamic Treatment Regimes S.A. Murphy At NIAID, BRB December, 2007](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032704/56649d6a5503460f94a48c1b/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
17
Reality
UnknownCauses
T1 R T2 Y
![Page 18: Experiments and Dynamic Treatment Regimes S.A. Murphy At NIAID, BRB December, 2007](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032704/56649d6a5503460f94a48c1b/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
18
Defining the stage 2 effects
Simple case: two stages of treatment with only one factor at each stage, a early measure of response, R at the end of stage 1 and a primary outcome Y. The potential outcomes are
Define effects involving T2 in a saturated linear model for
![Page 19: Experiments and Dynamic Treatment Regimes S.A. Murphy At NIAID, BRB December, 2007](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032704/56649d6a5503460f94a48c1b/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
19
Defining the stage 2 effects
Suppose the factors T1 and T2 are randomized. Assume consistency (Robins, 1997) then
![Page 20: Experiments and Dynamic Treatment Regimes S.A. Murphy At NIAID, BRB December, 2007](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032704/56649d6a5503460f94a48c1b/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
20
Defining the stage 2 effects
Define (factorial) effects involving T2 in a saturated linear model
![Page 21: Experiments and Dynamic Treatment Regimes S.A. Murphy At NIAID, BRB December, 2007](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032704/56649d6a5503460f94a48c1b/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
21
Defining the stage 2 effects
![Page 22: Experiments and Dynamic Treatment Regimes S.A. Murphy At NIAID, BRB December, 2007](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032704/56649d6a5503460f94a48c1b/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
22
Defining the stage 1 effects (T1)
UnknownCauses
T1 R T2 Y
![Page 23: Experiments and Dynamic Treatment Regimes S.A. Murphy At NIAID, BRB December, 2007](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032704/56649d6a5503460f94a48c1b/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
23
Defining the stage 1 effects
UnknownCauses
T1 R T2 Y
![Page 24: Experiments and Dynamic Treatment Regimes S.A. Murphy At NIAID, BRB December, 2007](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032704/56649d6a5503460f94a48c1b/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
24
Defining the stage 1 effects
Define effects involving only T1 in a saturated linear model
The above is equal to
when {T1, T2} are randomized and T2 has a discrete uniform distribution on {-1,1}.
![Page 25: Experiments and Dynamic Treatment Regimes S.A. Murphy At NIAID, BRB December, 2007](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032704/56649d6a5503460f94a48c1b/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
25
Defining the stage 1 effects
In general when {T1, T2} are randomized
![Page 26: Experiments and Dynamic Treatment Regimes S.A. Murphy At NIAID, BRB December, 2007](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032704/56649d6a5503460f94a48c1b/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
26
Why marginal, why uniform?Define effects involving only T1 via
1) The defined effects are causal.
2) The defined effects are consistent with tradition in experimental design for screening.
– The main effect for one treatment factor is defined by marginalizing over the remaining treatment factors using a discrete uniform distribution.
![Page 27: Experiments and Dynamic Treatment Regimes S.A. Murphy At NIAID, BRB December, 2007](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032704/56649d6a5503460f94a48c1b/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
27
Surprisingly both stage 1 and 2 effects can be represented in one (nonstandard) linear model:
Representing the effects
![Page 28: Experiments and Dynamic Treatment Regimes S.A. Murphy At NIAID, BRB December, 2007](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032704/56649d6a5503460f94a48c1b/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
28
where
Causal effects:
Nuisance parameters: and
![Page 29: Experiments and Dynamic Treatment Regimes S.A. Murphy At NIAID, BRB December, 2007](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032704/56649d6a5503460f94a48c1b/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
29
Two Stage Design: I=ABCDF2=ABCDG2
A B C D F2=G2
- - - - +
- - - + -
- - + - -
- - + + +
- + - - -
- + - + +
- + + - +
- + + + -
+ - - - -
+ - - + +
+ - + - +
+ - + + -
+ + - - +
+ + - + -
+ + + - -
+ + + + +
![Page 30: Experiments and Dynamic Treatment Regimes S.A. Murphy At NIAID, BRB December, 2007](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032704/56649d6a5503460f94a48c1b/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
30
General FormulaSaturated model (for both R=0, 1)
Z1 matrix of stage 1 factor columns, Z2 is the matrix of stage 2 factor columns, Y is a vector, p is the vector of response rates
Classical saturated factorial effects model
![Page 31: Experiments and Dynamic Treatment Regimes S.A. Murphy At NIAID, BRB December, 2007](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032704/56649d6a5503460f94a48c1b/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
31
Aliasing
![Page 32: Experiments and Dynamic Treatment Regimes S.A. Murphy At NIAID, BRB December, 2007](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032704/56649d6a5503460f94a48c1b/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
32
Aliasing (Identification of Effects)
In classical designs, the defining words immediately yield the aliasing. For example I=ABCDF means that only the sum of the main effect of F and the four way interaction, ABCD can be identified. The two effects can not be separately estimated.
We can do the same here with a caveat.
![Page 33: Experiments and Dynamic Treatment Regimes S.A. Murphy At NIAID, BRB December, 2007](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032704/56649d6a5503460f94a48c1b/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
33
Aliasing (Identification of Effects) The rows of {Z1, Z2} are determined by the
experimental design; each column in Z1 is associated with a stage 1 factorial effect and similarly each column in Z2 is associated with a stage 2 factorial effect.
Fractional factorial designs lead to common columns in {Z1, Z2}; these columns are given by the defining words.
![Page 34: Experiments and Dynamic Treatment Regimes S.A. Murphy At NIAID, BRB December, 2007](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032704/56649d6a5503460f94a48c1b/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
34
Aliasing (Identification of Effects)
Consider designs for which the defining words indicate a shared column in both Z1 and Z2 only if the column in Z1 can be safely assumed to have a zero η coefficient or if the column in Z2 can be safely assumed to have a zero β, α coefficient. The defining words then provide the aliasing in this case.
![Page 35: Experiments and Dynamic Treatment Regimes S.A. Murphy At NIAID, BRB December, 2007](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032704/56649d6a5503460f94a48c1b/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
35
Six Factors:
Stage 1: T1={A, B, C, D}, each with 2 levels
Stage 2: T2= {F2--only for stage 1 responders,
G2--only for stage 1 nonresponders}, each with 2 levels
(26= 64 simple dynamic treatment regimes)
Simple Example for Two Stages
![Page 36: Experiments and Dynamic Treatment Regimes S.A. Murphy At NIAID, BRB December, 2007](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032704/56649d6a5503460f94a48c1b/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
36
Two Stage Design: I=ABCDF2=ABCDG2
A B C D F2=G2
- - - - +
- - - + -
- - + - -
- - + + +
- + - - -
- + - + +
- + + - +
- + + + -
+ - - - -
+ - - + +
+ - + - +
+ - + + -
+ + - - +
+ + - + -
+ + + - -
+ + + + +
![Page 37: Experiments and Dynamic Treatment Regimes S.A. Murphy At NIAID, BRB December, 2007](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032704/56649d6a5503460f94a48c1b/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
37
Simple Example
• This design has defining words: 1=ABCDF2=ABCDG2
• The labels of the identical columns in Z1, Z2 are CD=ABG2, ABC=DG2, F2DC=AB………..
![Page 38: Experiments and Dynamic Treatment Regimes S.A. Murphy At NIAID, BRB December, 2007](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032704/56649d6a5503460f94a48c1b/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
38
Formal Assumptions for this Design
• We use this design if we can
•assume that all three way and higher order stage 2 effects are negligible (ABG2, ABF2, ABCG2, ABCF2, ….)—these are all β and α parameters.
•assume all four way and higher order effects involving R and stage 1 factors are negligible (R-p)ABCD, (R-p)ABC, (R-p)ABD …--- these are all η parameters.
1=ABCDF2=ABCDG2
![Page 39: Experiments and Dynamic Treatment Regimes S.A. Murphy At NIAID, BRB December, 2007](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032704/56649d6a5503460f94a48c1b/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
39
Aliasing for this Design
• Stage 1 main effects and stage 2 four-way interactions are aliased (e.g. A=BCDF2, etc.).
• Stage 1 two way interactions and stage 2 three way interactions are aliased (e.g. CD=ABG2, AB=CDF2, etc.)
• Stage 1 three way interactions and stage 2 two way interactions are aliased (e.g. ABC=DF2, ABC=DG2, etc.)
• The Stage 1 four way interaction and stage 2 main effects are aliased (e.g. ABCD=F2, ABCD=G2).
1=ABCDF2=ABCDG2
![Page 40: Experiments and Dynamic Treatment Regimes S.A. Murphy At NIAID, BRB December, 2007](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032704/56649d6a5503460f94a48c1b/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
40
Working Assumptions for this Design
• Stage 2 three-way and four-way interactions are negligible.
• Stage 1 three-way and four-way interactions are negligible.
If the working assumptions are correct then we will be able to estimate the “non-aliased” main and two-way interactions for both stage 1 and stage 2.
![Page 41: Experiments and Dynamic Treatment Regimes S.A. Murphy At NIAID, BRB December, 2007](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032704/56649d6a5503460f94a48c1b/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
41
Analysis for this designRecall that
• Many columns in Z1, Z2 are identical (hence the aliasing of effects). Eliminate all multiple copies of columns and label remaining columns as stage 1 (or stage 2) main and two-way interaction effects.
• Replace response rates in p by observed response rates.
• Fit model.
![Page 42: Experiments and Dynamic Treatment Regimes S.A. Murphy At NIAID, BRB December, 2007](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032704/56649d6a5503460f94a48c1b/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
42
Interesting Result in Simulations
• In simulations formal assumptions are violated.
• Response rates (probability of R=1) across 16 cells range from .55 to .73
• Results are surprisingly robust to violations of formal assumptions.
•The maximal value of the correlation between 32 estimators of effects was .12 and average absolute correlation value is .03
•Why? Binary R variables can not vary that much. If response rate is constant, then the effect estimators are uncorrelated as in classical experimental design.
![Page 43: Experiments and Dynamic Treatment Regimes S.A. Murphy At NIAID, BRB December, 2007](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032704/56649d6a5503460f94a48c1b/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
43
Discussion
• Compare this to using observational studies to construct dynamic treatment regimes– Uncontrolled selection bias (causal misattributions)– Uncontrolled aliasing.
• Secondary analyses would assess if other variables collected during treatment should enter decision rules.
![Page 44: Experiments and Dynamic Treatment Regimes S.A. Murphy At NIAID, BRB December, 2007](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032704/56649d6a5503460f94a48c1b/html5/thumbnails/44.jpg)
44
• Joint work with– Derek Bingham (Simon Fraser)
• And informed by discussions with– Vijay Nair (U. Michigan)– Bibhas Chakraborty (U. Michigan)– Vic Strecher (U. Michigan)
• This seminar can be found at: http:// www.stat. lsa.umich.edu/~samurphy/seminars/NIAID12.07.ppt