IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jnlasa/v111y2016i516p1509-1521.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Personalized Dose Finding Using Outcome Weighted Learning

Author

Listed:
  • Guanhua Chen
  • Donglin Zeng
  • Michael R. Kosorok

Abstract

In dose-finding clinical trials, it is becoming increasingly important to account for individual-level heterogeneity while searching for optimal doses to ensure an optimal individualized dose rule (IDR) maximizes the expected beneficial clinical outcome for each individual. In this article, we advocate a randomized trial design where candidate dose levels assigned to study subjects are randomly chosen from a continuous distribution within a safe range. To estimate the optimal IDR using such data, we propose an outcome weighted learning method based on a nonconvex loss function, which can be solved efficiently using a difference of convex functions algorithm. The consistency and convergence rate for the estimated IDR are derived, and its small-sample performance is evaluated via simulation studies. We demonstrate that the proposed method outperforms competing approaches. Finally, we illustrate this method using data from a cohort study for warfarin (an anti-thrombotic drug) dosing. Supplementary materials for this article are available online.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:jnlasa:v:111:y:2016:i:516:p:1509-1521
    DOI: 10.1080/01621459.2016.1148611
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/01621459.2016.1148611
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/01621459.2016.1148611?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Baqun Zhang & Anastasios A. Tsiatis & Eric B. Laber & Marie Davidian, 2012. "A Robust Method for Estimating Optimal Treatment Regimes," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 68(4), pages 1010-1018, December.
    2. Friedman, Jerome H. & Hastie, Trevor & Tibshirani, Rob, 2010. "Regularization Paths for Generalized Linear Models via Coordinate Descent," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 33(i01).
    3. 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.
    4. T. Cai & L. Tian & Hajime Uno & Scott D. Solomon & L. J. Wei, 2010. "Calibrating parametric subject-specific risk estimation," Biometrika, Biometrika Trust, vol. 97(2), pages 389-404.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. Moodie, Erica E. M. & Platt, Robert W. & Kramer, Michael S., 2009. "Estimating Response-Maximized Decision Rules With Applications to Breastfeeding," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 104(485), pages 155-165.
    8. 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.
    9. Kosuke Imai & David A. van Dyk, 2004. "Causal Inference With General Treatment Regimes: Generalizing the Propensity Score," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 99, pages 854-866, January.
    10. 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.
    11. Karatzoglou, Alexandros & Smola, Alexandros & Hornik, Kurt & Zeileis, Achim, 2004. "kernlab - An S4 Package for Kernel Methods in R," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 11(i09).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. 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.
    2. Zhou, Yunzhe & Qi, Zhengling & Shi, Chengchun & Li, Lexin, 2023. "Optimizing pessimism in dynamic treatment regimes: a Bayesian learning approach," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 118233, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    3. Chunrong Ai & Yue Fang & Haitian Xie, 2024. "Data-driven Policy Learning for a Continuous Treatment," Papers 2402.02535, arXiv.org.
    4. Susan Athey & Stefan Wager, 2021. "Policy Learning With Observational Data," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 89(1), pages 133-161, January.
    5. Peng Jin & Wenbin Lu & Yu Chen & Mengling Liu, 2023. "Change‐plane analysis for subgroup detection with a continuous treatment," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 79(3), pages 1920-1933, September.
    6. Xiaohong Chen & Zhengling Qi & Runzhe Wan, 2023. "STEEL: Singularity-aware Reinforcement Learning," Papers 2301.13152, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2024.
    7. Jingxiang Chen & Haoda Fu & Xuanyao He & Michael R. Kosorok & Yufeng Liu, 2018. "Estimating individualized treatment rules for ordinal treatments," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 74(3), pages 924-933, September.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. Cai, Hengrui & Shi, Chengchun & Song, Rui & Lu, Wenbin, 2023. "Jump interval-learning for individualized decision making with continuous treatments," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 118231, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.

    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. 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.
    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. 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.
    4. Crystal T. Nguyen & Daniel J. Luckett & Anna R. Kahkoska & Grace E. Shearrer & Donna Spruijt‐Metz & Jaimie N. Davis & Michael R. Kosorok, 2020. "Estimating individualized treatment regimes from crossover designs," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 76(3), pages 778-788, September.
    5. 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.
    6. Xinyang Huang & Jin Xu, 2020. "Estimating individualized treatment rules with risk constraint," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 76(4), pages 1310-1318, December.
    7. Giorgos Bakoyannis, 2023. "Estimating optimal individualized treatment rules with multistate processes," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 79(4), pages 2830-2842, December.
    8. Yanqing Wang & Yingqi Zhao & Yingye Zheng, 2022. "Targeted Search for Individualized Clinical Decision Rules to Optimize Clinical Outcomes," Statistics in Biosciences, Springer;International Chinese Statistical Association, vol. 14(3), pages 564-581, December.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. 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).
    12. Kristin A. Linn & Eric B. Laber & Leonard A. Stefanski, 2017. "Interactive -Learning for Quantiles," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 112(518), pages 638-649, April.
    13. Qingyuan Zhao & Dylan S. Small & Ashkan Ertefaie, 2022. "Selective inference for effect modification via the lasso," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 84(2), pages 382-413, April.
    14. 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.
    15. Michael C Knaus & Michael Lechner & Anthony Strittmatter, 2021. "Machine learning estimation of heterogeneous causal effects: Empirical Monte Carlo evidence," The Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 24(1), pages 134-161.
    16. Xin Qiu & Donglin Zeng & Yuanjia Wang, 2018. "Estimation and evaluation of linear individualized treatment rules to guarantee performance," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 74(2), pages 517-528, June.
    17. 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.
    18. Huber, Martin, 2019. "An introduction to flexible methods for policy evaluation," FSES Working Papers 504, Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences, University of Freiburg/Fribourg Switzerland.
    19. Wei Liu & Zhiwei Zhang & Lei Nie & Guoxing Soon, 2017. "A Case Study in Personalized Medicine: Rilpivirine Versus Efavirenz for Treatment-Naive HIV Patients," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 112(520), pages 1381-1392, October.
    20. Kara E. Rudolph & Iván Díaz, 2022. "When the ends do not justify the means: Learning who is predicted to have harmful indirect effects," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 185(S2), pages 573-589, December.

    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:taf:jnlasa:v:111:y:2016:i:516:p:1509-1521. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/UASA20 .

    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.