IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jorssc/v71y2022i2p309-330.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ranking tailoring variables for constructing individualized treatment rules: An application to schizophrenia

Author

Listed:
  • Jiacheng Wu
  • Nina Galanter
  • Susan M. Shortreed
  • Erica E.M. Moodie

Abstract

As with many chronic conditions, matching patients with schizophrenia to the best treatment option is difficult. Selecting antipsychotic medication is especially challenging because many of the medications can have burdensome side effects. Adjusting or tailoring medications based on patients' characteristics could improve symptoms. However, it is often not known which patient characteristics are most helpful for informing treatment selection. In this paper, we address the challenge of identifying and ranking important variables for tailoring treatment decisions. We consider a value‐search approach implemented through dynamic marginal structural models to estimate an optimal individualized treatment rule. We apply our methodology to the Clinical Antipsychotics Trial of Intervention and Effectiveness (CATIE) study for schizophrenia, to evaluate if some tailoring variables have greater potential than others for selecting treatments for patients with schizophrenia (Stroup et al., 2003, Schizophrenia Bulletin, 29, 15–31).

Suggested Citation

  • Jiacheng Wu & Nina Galanter & Susan M. Shortreed & Erica E.M. Moodie, 2022. "Ranking tailoring variables for constructing individualized treatment rules: An application to schizophrenia," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 71(2), pages 309-330, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jorssc:v:71:y:2022:i:2:p:309-330
    DOI: 10.1111/rssc.12533
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/rssc.12533
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/rssc.12533?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yingqi Zhao & Donglin Zeng & A. John Rush & Michael R. Kosorok, 2012. "Estimating Individualized Treatment Rules Using Outcome Weighted Learning," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 107(499), pages 1106-1118, September.
    2. Zou, Hui, 2006. "The Adaptive Lasso and Its Oracle Properties," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 101, pages 1418-1429, December.
    3. Jincheng Shen & Lu Wang & Jeremy M. G. Taylor, 2017. "Estimation of the optimal regime in treatment of prostate cancer recurrence from observational data using flexible weighting models," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 73(2), pages 635-645, June.
    4. Wensheng Zhu & Donglin Zeng & Rui Song, 2019. "Proper Inference for Value Function in High-Dimensional Q-Learning for Dynamic Treatment Regimes," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 114(527), pages 1404-1417, July.
    5. Cain Lauren E. & Robins James M. & Lanoy Emilie & Logan Roger & Costagliola Dominique & Hernán Miguel A., 2010. "When to Start Treatment? A Systematic Approach to the Comparison of Dynamic Regimes Using Observational Data," The International Journal of Biostatistics, De Gruyter, vol. 6(2), pages 1-26, April.
    6. van der Laan Mark J. & Petersen Maya L, 2007. "Causal Effect Models for Realistic Individualized Treatment and Intention to Treat Rules," The International Journal of Biostatistics, De Gruyter, vol. 3(1), pages 1-55, March.
    7. Xin Zhou & Nicole Mayer-Hamblett & Umer Khan & Michael R. Kosorok, 2017. "Residual Weighted Learning for Estimating Individualized Treatment Rules," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 112(517), pages 169-187, January.
    8. Michael P. Wallace & Erica E. M. Moodie, 2015. "Doubly‐robust dynamic treatment regimen estimation via weighted least squares," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 71(3), pages 636-644, September.
    9. Keisuke Hirano & Guido W. Imbens & Geert Ridder, 2003. "Efficient Estimation of Average Treatment Effects Using the Estimated Propensity Score," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 71(4), pages 1161-1189, July.
    10. Susan M. Shortreed & Erica E. M. Moodie, 2012. "Estimating the optimal dynamic antipsychotic treatment regime: evidence from the sequential multiple-assignment randomized Clinical Antipsychotic Trials of Intervention and Effectiveness schizophrenia," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 61(4), pages 577-599, August.
    11. Guido W. Imbens, 2004. "Nonparametric Estimation of Average Treatment Effects Under Exogeneity: A Review," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 86(1), pages 4-29, February.
    12. Francis K. C. Hui & David I. Warton & Scott D. Foster, 2015. "Tuning Parameter Selection for the Adaptive Lasso Using ERIC," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 110(509), pages 262-269, March.
    13. Biernot Peter & Moodie Erica E. M., 2010. "A Comparison of Variable Selection Approaches for Dynamic Treatment Regimes," The International Journal of Biostatistics, De Gruyter, vol. 6(1), pages 1-20, January.
    14. Robin Henderson & Phil Ansell & Deyadeen Alshibani, 2010. "Regret-Regression for Optimal Dynamic Treatment Regimes," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 66(4), pages 1192-1201, December.
    15. Ruoqing Zhu & Ying-Qi Zhao & Guanhua Chen & Shuangge Ma & Hongyu Zhao, 2017. "Greedy outcome weighted tree learning of optimal personalized treatment rules," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 73(2), pages 391-400, June.
    16. S. A. Murphy, 2003. "Optimal dynamic treatment regimes," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 65(2), pages 331-355, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Zhen Li & Jie Chen & Eric Laber & Fang Liu & Richard Baumgartner, 2023. "Optimal Treatment Regimes: A Review and Empirical Comparison," International Statistical Review, International Statistical Institute, vol. 91(3), pages 427-463, December.
    2. Q. Clairon & R. Henderson & N. J. Young & E. D. Wilson & C. J. Taylor, 2021. "Adaptive treatment and robust control," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 77(1), pages 223-236, March.
    3. Ruoqing Zhu & Ying-Qi Zhao & Guanhua Chen & Shuangge Ma & Hongyu Zhao, 2017. "Greedy outcome weighted tree learning of optimal personalized treatment rules," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 73(2), pages 391-400, June.
    4. Yunan Wu & Lan Wang, 2021. "Resampling‐based confidence intervals for model‐free robust inference on optimal treatment regimes," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 77(2), pages 465-476, June.
    5. Weibin Mo & Yufeng Liu, 2022. "Efficient learning of optimal individualized treatment rules for heteroscedastic or misspecified treatment‐free effect models," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 84(2), pages 440-472, April.
    6. Guanhua Chen & Donglin Zeng & Michael R. Kosorok, 2016. "Personalized Dose Finding Using Outcome Weighted Learning," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 111(516), pages 1509-1521, October.
    7. Shi, Chengchun & Wan, Runzhe & Song, Ge & Luo, Shikai & Zhu, Hongtu & Song, Rui, 2023. "A multiagent reinforcement learning framework for off-policy evaluation in two-sided markets," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 117174, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    8. Jacqueline A. Mauro & Edward H. Kennedy & Daniel Nagin, 2020. "Instrumental variable methods using dynamic interventions," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 183(4), pages 1523-1551, October.
    9. Martin Huber, 2019. "An introduction to flexible methods for policy evaluation," Papers 1910.00641, arXiv.org.
    10. Jelena Bradic & Weijie Ji & Yuqian Zhang, 2021. "High-dimensional Inference for Dynamic Treatment Effects," Papers 2110.04924, arXiv.org, revised May 2023.
    11. Zhengyuan Zhou & Susan Athey & Stefan Wager, 2023. "Offline Multi-Action Policy Learning: Generalization and Optimization," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 71(1), pages 148-183, January.
    12. Ruohan Zhan & Zhimei Ren & Susan Athey & Zhengyuan Zhou, 2024. "Policy Learning with Adaptively Collected Data," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 70(8), pages 5270-5297, August.
    13. Farrell, Max H., 2015. "Robust inference on average treatment effects with possibly more covariates than observations," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 189(1), pages 1-23.
    14. Michael P. Wallace & Erica E. M. Moodie, 2015. "Doubly‐robust dynamic treatment regimen estimation via weighted least squares," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 71(3), pages 636-644, September.
    15. Wallace, Michael P. & Moodie, Erica E. M. & Stephens, David A., 2017. "Dynamic Treatment Regimen Estimation via Regression-Based Techniques: Introducing R Package DTRreg," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 80(i02).
    16. Susan Athey & Stefan Wager, 2021. "Policy Learning With Observational Data," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 89(1), pages 133-161, January.
    17. Shi, Chengchun & Luo, Shikai & Le, Yuan & Zhu, Hongtu & Song, Rui, 2022. "Statistically efficient advantage learning for offline reinforcement learning in infinite horizons," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 115598, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    18. Eric B. Laber & Daniel J. Lizotte & Bradley Ferguson, 2014. "Set-valued dynamic treatment regimes for competing outcomes," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 70(1), pages 53-61, March.
    19. Yizhe Xu & Tom H. Greene & Adam P. Bress & Brian C. Sauer & Brandon K. Bellows & Yue Zhang & William S. Weintraub & Andrew E. Moran & Jincheng Shen, 2022. "Estimating the optimal individualized treatment rule from a cost‐effectiveness perspective," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 78(1), pages 337-351, March.
    20. Rahul Singh & Liyuan Xu & Arthur Gretton, 2020. "Kernel Methods for Causal Functions: Dose, Heterogeneous, and Incremental Response Curves," Papers 2010.04855, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2022.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jorssc:v:71:y:2022:i:2:p:309-330. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rssssea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.