Intercurrent (post-treatment) events occur frequently in randomized trials, and investigators often express interest in treatment effects that suitably take account of these events. A naive conditioning on intercurrent events does not have a straight-forward causal interpretation, and the practical relevance of other commonly used approaches is debated. In this work, we discuss how to formulate and choose an estimand, beyond the marginal intention to treat effect, from the point of view of a decision maker and drug developer. In particular, we argue that careful articulation of a practically useful research question should either reflect decision making at this point in time or future drug development. Indeed, a substantially interesting estimand is a formalization of the (plain English) description of a research question. A common feature of estimands that are practically useful is that they correspond to possibly hypothetical but well-defined interventions in identifiable (sub)populations. To illustrate our points, we consider five examples that were recently used to motivate consideration of principal stratum estimands in clinical trials. In all of these examples, we propose alternative causal estimands, such as conditional effects, sequential regime effects and separable effects, that correspond to explicit research questions of substantial interest. Certain questions require stronger assumptions for identification. However, we highlight that our proposed estimands require less stringent assumptions than estimands commonly targeted in these settings, including principal stratum effects.
翻译:在随机审判中经常发生间歇性(后处理)事件,调查人员往往表示对适当顾及这些事件的治疗效果感兴趣。对间歇性事件的天真搭配并没有直截了当的因果关系解释,而且辩论了其他常用方法的实际相关性。在这项工作中,我们讨论如何从决策者和药物开发者的角度来制定和选择一个估计,而不仅是治标的边际意图。特别是,我们争辩说,仔细阐述一个实际有用的研究问题,应该反映此时此刻的决策或未来的药物发展。事实上,一个非常有趣的估计是对研究问题的(平方英文)描述的正规化。一个实际有用的估计的共同特征是,它们与可识别的(子)人口中可能假设但定义明确的干预措施相对应。为了说明我们的观点,我们考虑最近用来激励在临床试验中考虑主要直线估计和估计的五个例子。在所有这些例子中,我们建议采用其他因果估计,例如:固定效果、按顺序排列的假设和按部位设定的假设要求我们不那么严格的假设。然而,我们提出的研究和按部位的假设要求我们更严格地研究的假设要求我们更强烈的兴趣。