Machine learning for randomised controlled trials: identifying treatment effect heterogeneity with strict control of type I error
Abstract
BackgroundIt is widely acknowledged that retrospective exploratory analyses of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) seeking to identify treatment effect heterogeneity (TEH) are prone to bias and false positives. Yet the increasing availability of multiple data modalities on subjects and the desire to learn all we can from trial participants motivates the inclusion of such analyses within RCTs. Coupled to this, widespread advances in AI and machine learning (ML) methods hold great potential to utilise such data to characterise subjects exhibiting heterogeneous treatment response.\n\nMethodsWe present new learning strategies for RCT ML discovery methods that ensure strict control of the false positive reporting rate at a pre-specified level. Our approach uses randomised data partitioning and statistical or ML based prediction on held-out data. This can test for both crossover and non-crossover TEH. The former is done via a two-sample hypothesis test measuring overall predictive performance of the ML method. The latter is done via stacking the ML predictors alongside a classical statistical model to formally test the added benefit of the ML algorithm. An adaptation of recent statistical theory allows for the construction of a valid aggregate p-value. This learning strategy is agnostic to the choice of ML method.\n\nResultsWe demonstrate our approach with a re-analysis of the SEAQUAMAT trial. We find no evidence for any crossover subgroup who would benefit from a change in treatment from the current standard-of-care, artesunate, but strong evidence for significant noncrossover TEH within the artesunate treatment group. We find that artesunate provides a differential benefit to patients with high numbers of circulating ring stage parasites.\n\nConclusionsOur ML approach combined with the use of computational notebooks and version control can improve the robustness and transparency of RCT exploratory analyses. The methods allow researchers to apply the latest ML techniques safe in the knowledge that any declared associations are statistically significant at a user defined level.
02 /Specification & Classification
Click any tag to browse matching papers- Citations
- 21
- FWCI
- 2.29
- Field percentile
- top 10%
- Research Focus
- Approach
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- A machine learning method for subgroup analysis of randomized controlled trials
Ljubomir J. Buturović·bioRxiv·Jun 4, 2018
- Graphing and reporting heterogeneous treatment effects through reference classes
James A Watson, Chris C. Holmes·TrialsPeer-reviewed·May 7, 2020
- Application of machine learning methods in clinical trials for precision medicine
Yizhuo Wang, Bing Z. Carter, … Xuelin Huang·JAMIA OpenPeer-reviewed·Jan 7, 2022
- Hierarchical confounder discovery in the experiment-machine learning cycle
Alex Rogozhnikov, Pavan Ramkumar, … G. Sean Escola·PatternsPeer-reviewed·Feb 22, 2022
- A Machine Learning approach for assessing drug development risk
Vangelis Vergetis, Gerasimos Liaropoulos, … Aristotelis Tsirigos·bioRxiv·Oct 8, 2020
- Machine learning algorithms for systematic reviews: reducing workload in a preclinical review of animal studies and reducing human screening error
Alexandra Bannach‐Brown, Piotr Przybyła, … Malcolm Robert Macleod·Systematic ReviewsPeer-reviewed·Jan 15, 2019