Application of statistical decision theory to treatment choices: implications for the design and analysis of clinical trials.

Statistics in Medicine (Impact Factor: 2.04). 09/1986; 5(5):411-20. DOI: 10.1002/sim.4780050505
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT This paper explores the application of statistical decision theory to treatment choices in cancer which involve difficult value judgements in weighing beneficial and deleterious outcomes of treatment. Strengths and weaknesses of using decision theory are illustrated by considering the problem of selecting chemotherapy in advanced ovarian cancer. The paper includes an assessment of individual preferences in 27 volunteers and a discussion of some problems in utility assessment. An alternative approach, using threshold analysis, is presented in which the results of the decision analysis are expressed as a function of utility parameters. By knowing what sets of utilities favour each treatment, the assessment of patient preferences can then be focused on important differences of treatment options. The implications of these results for the design and analysis of clinical trials are discussed.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Those who report a clinical trial should acknowledge the right of the ‘consumer’ to make decisions based on his own valuation of the beneficial and adverse effects which rival treatments may have. Suppose a new patient is inclined to trade one unit of benefit for c units of complication. Then he should (should not) be given the treatment if his estimated utility gain, χ1 -cχ2, is positive (negative) and statistically significant according to the data of the trial: here χ1 (χ2) denotes the observed average benefit (complication level). If the estimated gain is not statistically significant, the data do not allow any firm recommendation. This c-dependent recommendation in general cannot be determined from inspection of a joint confidence region for the two means concerned. Therefore investigators should present the outcome of the significance test as a function of c (inverted inference). Typically there are several types of adverse effect or benefit, in which case the quantity c must be generalized into a vector of personal relative utility weights.
    Statistics in Medicine 09/1987; 6(7):745 - 752. · 2.04 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This paper is intended as an overview of developments in the assessment of quality of life (QOL) in clinical trials over the last decade from the viewpoint of clinical biostatistics. In the first part we deal with aspects of obtaining adequate measurements of quality of life. A literature survey shows that a large number of quite heterogeneous measurement approaches for use in clinical trials exist, a substantial percentage of which cannot be regarded as sufficient for their actual measuring purpose. In the second part we review statistical methods applied to and adapted for the analysis of QOL data. Underlying the analysis should be the assumption of QOL as a stochastic process. Applied analysis procedures are again investigated in a literature survey. Finally, critical conclusions are outlined and suggestions for further research are given.
    Statistics in Medicine 01/1992; 10(12):1915-30. · 2.04 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Ovarian cancer is the leading cause of death in women with gynaecological cancers. The most common type of ovarian cancer is epithelial ovarian cancer. Referred to as the `silent' killer, this disease is difficult to detect because of the lack of specific symptoms. The majority of women who have ovarian cancer are diagnosed in the advanced stages. While the exact cause of ovarian cancer remains elusive, it is believed that the events relating to incessant ovulatory function play a major role in the development of this disease. Long term prognosis of women with ovarian cancer remains grim. Although ovarian cancer is highly responsive to chemotherapy, most women will develop persistent or recurrent disease after primary treatment. The standard front-line treatment is paclitaxel in combination with a platinum-based agent; however, toxicities associated with paclitaxel must be weighed against the clinical benefit. The economic issues associated with the treatment of ovarian cancer involve costs of chemotherapy agents and management of supportive care. Patient preferences and quality-of-life issues are also of major importance because of the short survival benefit for most patients. Therefore, quality of life must be maximised alongside efforts to prolong survival. More research is necessary to determine what trade-offs (e.g. adverse effects of treatment) patients are willing to make for modest gains in survival.
    PharmacoEconomics 01/2000; 17(2):133-150. · 2.86 Impact Factor