title: A regression tree approach to identifying subgroups with differential treatment effects.
abstract: In the fight against hard-to-treat diseases such as cancer, it is often difficult to discover new treatments that benefit all subjects. For regulatory agency approval, it is more practical to identify subgroups of subjects for whom the treatment has an enhanced effect. Regression trees are natural for this task because they partition the data space. We briefly review existing regression tree algorithms. Then, we introduce three new ones that are practically free of selection bias and are applicable to data from randomized trials with two or more treatments, censored response variables, and missing values in the predictor variables. The algorithms extend the generalized unbiased interaction detection and estimation (GUIDE) approach by using three key ideas: (i) treatment as a linear predictor, (ii) chi-squared tests to detect residual patterns and lack of fit, and (iii) proportional hazards modeling via Poisson regression. Importance scores with thresholds for identifying influential variables are obtained as by-products. A bootstrap technique is used to construct confidence intervals for the treatment effects in each node. The methods are compared using real and simulated data.
authors: Department of Statistics, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, 53706, U.S.A.
authors: Wei-Yin
authors: WY
authors: Loh
authors: Xu
authors: X
authors: He
authors: Michael
authors: M
authors: Man
mesh_terms: D000465:Algorithms; D016009:Chi-Square Distribution; D016001:Confidence Intervals; D006801:Humans; D015233:Models, Statistical; D009369:Neoplasms / Q000628:therapy*; D016012:Poisson Distribution; D016032:Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; D012044:Regression Analysis; D015983:Selection Bias
keywords: bootstrap; missing values; proportional hazards; selection bias
references: Stat Med. 2011 Sep 20;30(21):2601-21
references: 21786278
references: J Clin Epidemiol. 1995 May;48(5):675-89
references: 7730923
references: Ther Adv Med Oncol. 2010 Mar;2(2):125-48
references: 21789130
references: J Clin Oncol. 2011 Dec 10;29(35):4718; author reply 4718-9
references: 22042948
references: Int Stat Rev. 2014 Dec 1;82(3):359-361
references: 25844011
references: Stat Med. 2011 Oct 30;30(24):2867-80
references: 21815180
references: BMC Bioinformatics. 2007 Jan 25;8:25
references: 17254353
references: J Clin Oncol. 1994 Oct;12(10):2086-93
references: 7931478
references: Stat Med. 2014 Jan 30;33(2):219-37
references: 23922224
references: Biometrics. 1994 Jun;50(2):471-85
references: 8068846
references: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1931 Dec;17(12):684-8
references: 16577411
references: Int J Biostat. 2008 Jan 28;4(1):Article 2
references: 20231911
references: Biometrics. 1946 Dec;2(6):110-4
references: 20287815
references: Stat Med. 1996 Feb 15;15(3):263-71
references: 8643884