Cited by 291Statistical Methods in Clinical TrialsAdvanced Causal Inference TechniquesStatistical Methods and Inference

Tutorial in biostatistics: data‐driven subgroup identification and analysis in clinical trials

Lipkovich, Ilya, Dmitrienko, Alex, B., Ralph·2017·Statistics in Medicine

Abstract

It is well known that both the direction and magnitude of the treatment effect in clinical trials are often affected by baseline patient characteristics (generally referred to as biomarkers). Characterization of treatment effect heterogeneity plays a central role in the field of personalized medicine and facilitates the development of tailored therapies. This tutorial focuses on a general class of problems arising in data‐driven subgroup analysis, namely, identification of biomarkers with strong predictive properties and patient subgroups with desirable characteristics such as improved benefit and/or safety. Limitations of ad‐hoc approaches to biomarker exploration and subgroup identification in clinical trials are discussed, and the ad‐hoc approaches are contrasted with principled approaches to exploratory subgroup analysis based on recent advances in machine learning and data mining. A general framework for evaluating predictive biomarkers and identification of associated subgroups is introduced. The tutorial provides a review of a broad class of statistical methods used in subgroup discovery, including global outcome modeling methods, global treatment effect modeling methods, optimal treatment regimes, and local modeling methods. Commonly used subgroup identification methods are illustrated using two case studies based on clinical trials with binary and survival endpoints. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/sim.7064

Cites

101 of 101 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Penalisation methods such as ridge, LASSO, and elastic net generally lead to smaller absolute values of coefficients (shrink coefficients towards zero) compared with maximum likelihood estimation.

    “Penalisation methods such as ridge, LASSO (least absolute shrinkage and selection operator), and elastic net generally lead to smaller absolute values of the coefficients—that is, they shrink coefficients towards zero—compared with maximum likelihood estimation.”

    From Developing clinical prediction models: a step-by-step guide (2024) · cites this paper as [72]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lipkovich, I., Dmitrienko, A., & B., R.
Affiliations
  • IQVIA (United States) (US)
  • Mediana, Inc. Overland Park KS U.S.A.
  • Boston University Boston MA U.S.A.
Corresponding author
Lipkovich, Ilya
Venue
Statistics in Medicine
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2016-08-03
Volume
36
Issue
1
Pages
136-196
ISSN
  • 0277-6715 (ISSN-L)
  • 1097-0258
OpenAlex
W2476265589
Cited by
291
References
101
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 27 · 2023: 36 · 2022: 29 · 2021: 38 · 2020: 39 · 2019: 36 · 2018: 26 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 3
FWCI
24.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Statistics in Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Inference
Keywords
subgroup identification, predictive biomarkers, treatment effect heterogeneity, personalized medicine, clinical trials, machine learning, data mining, optimal treatment regimes, binary endpoints, survival endpoints
MeSH terms
Clinical Trials as Topic, Humans, Research Design, Biomarkers, Biostatistics, Data Mining, Precision Medicine

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review