Mediation analysis for survival data using semiparametric probit models
Corresponding Author
Yen-Tsung Huang
Departments of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Brown University, 121 South Main Street, Providence, Rhode Island 02912, U.S.A.
email: [email protected]Search for more papers by this authorTianxi Cai
Department of Biostatistics, Harvard School of Public Health, 655 Huntington Avenue, Boston, Massachusetts 02115, U.S.A.
Search for more papers by this authorCorresponding Author
Yen-Tsung Huang
Departments of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Brown University, 121 South Main Street, Providence, Rhode Island 02912, U.S.A.
email: [email protected]Search for more papers by this authorTianxi Cai
Department of Biostatistics, Harvard School of Public Health, 655 Huntington Avenue, Boston, Massachusetts 02115, U.S.A.
Search for more papers by this authorSummary
Causal mediation modeling has become a popular approach for studying the effect of an exposure on an outcome through mediators. Currently, the literature on mediation analyses with survival outcomes largely focused on settings with a single mediator and quantified the mediation effects on the hazard, log hazard and log survival time (Lange and Hansen 2011; VanderWeele 2011). In this article, we propose a multi-mediator model for survival data by employing a flexible semiparametric probit model. We characterize path-specific effects (PSEs) of the exposure on the outcome mediated through specific mediators. We derive closed form expressions for PSEs on a transformed survival time and the survival probabilities. Statistical inference on the PSEs is developed using a nonparametric maximum likelihood estimator under the semiparametric probit model and the functional Delta method. Results from simulation studies suggest that our proposed methods perform well in finite sample. We illustrate the utility of our method in a genomic study of glioblastoma multiforme survival.
Supporting Information
Additional Supporting Information may be found in the online version of this article.
| Filename | Description |
|---|---|
| biom12445-sup-0001-SuppData.pdf10.6 MB | Supplementary Materials. |
| biom12445-sup-0002-SuppDataCode.zip33.4 KB | Supplementary Materials Code. |
Please note: The publisher is not responsible for the content or functionality of any supporting information supplied by the authors. Any queries (other than missing content) should be directed to the corresponding author for the article.
References
- Albert, J. M. and Nelson, S. (2011). Generalized causal mediation analysis. Biometrics 67, 1028–1038.
- Anderson, P. K., Borgan, Ø., Gill, R. D., and Keiding, N. (1993). Statistical Models based on Counting Processes. New York: Springer.
- Anderson, P. K. and Gill, R. D. (1982). Cox's regression model for counting processes: A large sample study. Annals of Statistics 10, 1100–1120.
- Avin, C., Shpitser, I., and Pearl, J. (2005). Identifiability of path-specific effects. In Proceedings of the International Joint Conferences on Artificial Intelligence, pages 357–363.
- Baron, R. M. and Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical consideration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 51, 1173–1182.
- Bennett, S. (1983). Analysis of survival data by the proportional odds model. Statistics in Medicine 2, 273–277.
-
Cox, D. R.
(1972).
Regression models and life-tables (with discussion).
Journal of Royal Statistical Society, Series B
34,
187–220.
10.1111/j.2517-6161.1972.tb00899.x Google Scholar
- Horowitz, J. L. (1996). Semiparametric estimation of a regression model with an unknown transformation of the dependent variable. Econometrica 64, 103–137.
- Huang, Y. T. (2015). Integrative modeling of multi-platform genomic data under the framework of mediation analysis. Statistics in Medicine 34, 162–178.
- Imai, K., Keele, L., and Yamamoto, T. (2010). Identification, inference and sensitivity analysis for causal mediation effects. Statistical Science 25, 51–71.
- Issa, J. P., Gharibyan, V., Cortes, J., Jelinek, J., Morris, G., Verstovsek, S., et al. (2005). Phase II study of low-dose decitabine in patients with chronic myelogenous leukemia resistant to imatinib mesylate. Journal of Clinical Oncology 23, 3948–3956.
- Jia, P., Sun, J., Guo, A. Y., and Zhao, Z. (2010). SZGR: A comprehensive schizophrenia gene resource. Molecular Psychiatry 15, 453–462.
- Johnson, W. E., Rabinovic, A., and Lin, C. (2007). Adjusting batch effects in microarray expression data using Empirical Bayes methods. Biostatistics 8, 118–127.
- Kalbfleisch, J. D. and Prentice, R. L. (2002). The Statistical Analysis of Failure Time Data, 2nd Edition. Hoboken: Wiley.
- Kaminskas, E., Farrell, A., Abraham, S., Baird, A., Hsieh, L. S., Lee, S. L., et al. (2005). Approval summary: Azacitidine for treatment of myelodysplastic syndrome subtypes. Clinical Cancer Research 11, 3604–3608.
- Klein, R. W. and Sherman, R. P. (2002). Shift restrictions and semiparametric estimation in ordered response models. Econometrica 70, 663–691.
- Lange, T. and Hansen, J. V. (2011). Direct and indirect effects in a survival context. Epidemiology 22, 575–581.
- Lange, T., Rasmussen, M., and Thygesen, L. C. (2013). Assessing natural direct and indirect effect through multiple pathways. American Journal of Epidemiology 179, 513–518.
- Lin, H., Zhou, L., Li, C., and Li, Y. (2014). Semiparametric transformation models for semicompeting survival data. Biometrics 70, 599–607.
- Lin, X. and Wang, L. (2010). A semiparametric probit model for case 2 interval-censored failure time data. Statistics in Medicine 29, 972–981.
- Maria-del Mar, I., Bonavia, R., and Seoane, J. (2014). Glioblastoma multiforme: A look inside its heterogeneous nature. Cancers 6, 226–239.
- Pearl, J. (2001). Direct and indirect effects. In Proceedings of the Seventeenth Conference on Uncertainty and Artificial Intelligence, pages 411–420. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann.
- Robins, J. M. (2003). Semantics of causal DAG Models and the Identification of Direct and Indirect Effects. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
- Robins, J. M. and Greenland, S. (1992). Identifiability and exchangeability for direct and indirect effects. Epidemiology 3, 143–155.
- Smith, A. A., Huang, Y. T., Eliot, M., Houseman, E. A., Marsit, C. J., Wiencke, J. K., et al. (2014). A novel approach to the discovery of survival biomarkers in blioblastoma using a joint analysis of DNA methylation and gene expression. Epigenetics 9, 873–883.
- Suzuki, H., Maruyama, R., Yamamoto, E., and Kai, M. (2012). DNA methylation and microRNA dysregulation in cancer. Molecular Oncology 6, 567–578.
- Tchetgen Tchetgen, E. J. (2011). On causal mediation analysis with a survival outcome. The International Journal of Biostatistics 7, Article 33.
- Turan, N., Ghalwash, M. F., Katari, S., Coutifaris, C., Obradovic, Z., and Sapienza, C. (2012). DNA methylation differences at growth related genes correlate with birth weight: a molecular signature linked to developmental origins of adult disease? BMC Medical Genomics 5, 10.
- VanderWeele, T. J. (2011). Causal mediation analysis with survival data. Epidemiology 22, 582–585.
- VanderWeele, T. J. and Vansteelandt, S. (2013). Mediation analysis with multiple mediators. Epidemiologic Methods 2, 95–115.
- VanderWeele, T. J., Vansteelandt, S., and Robins, J. M. (2014). Effect decomposition in the presence of an exposure-induced mediator-outcome confounder. Epidemiology 25, 300–306.
- Xue, L. and Zou, H. (2012). Regularized rank-based estimation of high-dimensional nonparanormal graphical models. Annals of Statistics 40, 2541–2571.
- Zeng, D. and Lin, D. Y. (2007). Maximum likelihood estimation in semiparametric regression models with censored data. Journal of Royal Statistical Society, Series B 69, 507–564.
