» Articles » PMID: 39164562

Estimating Optimal Decision Trees for Treatment Assignment: The Case of K > 2 Treatment Alternatives

Overview
Publisher Springer
Specialty Social Sciences
Date 2024 Aug 20
PMID 39164562
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

For many problems in clinical practice, multiple treatment alternatives are available. Given data from a randomized controlled trial or an observational study, an important challenge is to estimate an optimal decision rule that specifies for each client the most effective treatment alternative, given his or her pattern of pretreatment characteristics. In the present paper we will look for such a rule within the insightful family of classification trees. Unfortunately, however, there is dearth of readily accessible software tools for optimal decision tree estimation in the case of more than two treatment alternatives. Moreover, this primary tree estimation problem is also cursed with two secondary problems: a structural missingness in typical studies on treatment evaluation (because every individual is assigned to a single treatment alternative only), and a major issue of replicability. In this paper we propose solutions for both the primary and the secondary problems at stake. We evaluate the proposed solution in a simulation study, and illustrate with an application on the search for an optimal tree-based treatment regime in a randomized controlled trial on K = 3 different types of aftercare for younger women with early-stage breast cancer. We conclude by arguing that the proposed solutions may have relevance for several other classification problems inside and outside the domain of optimal treatment assignment.

References
1.
Brookes S, Whitely E, Egger M, Davey Smith G, Mulheran P, Peters T . Subgroup analyses in randomized trials: risks of subgroup-specific analyses; power and sample size for the interaction test. J Clin Epidemiol. 2004; 57(3):229-36. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2003.08.009. View

2.
Chakraborty B, Murphy S . Dynamic Treatment Regimes. Annu Rev Stat Appl. 2014; 1:447-464. PMC: 4231831. DOI: 10.1146/annurev-statistics-022513-115553. View

3.
Dusseldorp E, Doove L, Van Mechelen I . Quint: An R package for the identification of subgroups of clients who differ in which treatment alternative is best for them. Behav Res Methods. 2015; 48(2):650-63. PMC: 4891398. DOI: 10.3758/s13428-015-0594-z. View

4.
Feinstein A . The problem of cogent subgroups: a clinicostatistical tragedy. J Clin Epidemiol. 1998; 51(4):297-9. DOI: 10.1016/s0895-4356(98)00004-3. View

5.
Huang X, Goldberg Y, Xu J . Multicategory individualized treatment regime using outcome weighted learning. Biometrics. 2019; 75(4):1216-1227. DOI: 10.1111/biom.13084. View