HOD: Handling missing data and time-varying confounding in causal inference for observational event history data

点击翻译按钮获取中文摘要

In medicine it is often important to obtain valid estimates of the effects (both beneficial and detrimental) of a new treatment. To do this, we typically compare outcomes in a group of patients who received the new treatment (treatment group) with those who did not receive the new treatment (control group). The randomised controlled trial (RCT) is the gold standard for obtaining these estimates of treatment effects because it fairly allocates patients to the two groups, which makes them likely to be comparable prior to the start of treatment, e.g. one group will not be older or younger, sicker or healthier and so on. However, RCTs are very expensive and complicated to run, and are not necessarily appropriate for answering all questions about the effects of treatment. For example, a drug may cause cancer as a side-effect, but the cancers may only appear after several years of treatment. It is then unlikely that an RCT would be maintained for long enough to detect this effect. It would therefore be very useful to measure the effects of treatments by looking only at data about patients who received the treatments as part of their normal care (through "observational studies").However unlike in RCTs, the investigators have no control over the assignment of patients to different treatment regimens in observational studies and therefore groups of patients given different drugs may differ in other ways as well. For example, patients with more severe disease may be more likely to be given drugs which are good at improving the disease but have unpleasant side-effects. If there is a difference in outcome found between the groups, it is not clear whether the difference is due to the fact that the groups are different beyond just the drugs received, or whether the difference was really caused by the treatment (i.e. it was a "causal effect"). One widely used method to make groups more comparable when estimating the causal effect is to calculate propensity scores. For each patient, his/her propensity score is the predicted probability of receiving a particular treatment based on that patient's characteristics at the time the treatment decision is made. Groups of patients with the same propensity score but different treatments should, on average, be comparable for all of their characteristics, and any differences in outcome between the groups should therefore be attributable to treatment.The aim of this project is to extend standard methods for obtaining causal treatment effects so that they can be used when important information about patient characteristics is missing and when patient's treatment changes over time. Both of these situations are common in observational studies, thus it is important to have reliable and robust ways to deal with them. We propose a programme of methodological research to address the above situations in observational studies, with a particular focus on the effect of treatments on the time to clinical events (e.g. how long does a patient survive after a surgery, or how soon after the start of a new treatment do unpleasant side-effects start appearing). This project will provide a general framework and guidelines for practitioners who use observational data in medical research.