Framework for personalized prediction of treatment response in relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis.
Algorithms
Bayes Theorem
Dimethyl Fumarate
/ therapeutic use
Disease Progression
Female
Fingolimod Hydrochloride
/ therapeutic use
Humans
Immunosuppressive Agents
/ therapeutic use
Male
Models, Theoretical
Multiple Sclerosis, Relapsing-Remitting
/ diagnosis
Outcome Assessment, Health Care
/ methods
Precision Medicine
/ methods
Prognosis
Recurrence
Treatment Adherence and Compliance
/ statistics & numerical data
Bayesian generalized linear model
Clinical decision support
Personalized health record
Personalized medicine
Personalized predictive models
Relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis
Journal
BMC medical research methodology
ISSN: 1471-2288
Titre abrégé: BMC Med Res Methodol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968545
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
07 02 2020
07 02 2020
Historique:
received:
31
01
2019
accepted:
20
01
2020
entrez:
8
2
2020
pubmed:
8
2
2020
medline:
12
1
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Personalized healthcare promises to successfully advance the treatment of heterogeneous neurological disorders such as relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis by addressing the caveats of traditional healthcare. This study presents a framework for personalized prediction of treatment response based on real-world data from the NeuroTransData network. A framework for personalized prediction of response to various treatments currently available for relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis patients was proposed. Two indicators of therapy effectiveness were used: number of relapses, and confirmed disability progression. The following steps were performed: (1) Data preprocessing and selection of predictors according to quality and inclusion criteria; (2) Implementation of hierarchical Bayesian generalized linear models for estimating treatment response; (3) Validation of the resulting predictive models based on several performance measures and routines, together with additional analyses that focus on evaluating the usability in clinical practice, such as comparing predicted treatment response with the empirically observed course of multiple sclerosis for different adherence profiles. The results revealed that the predictive models provide robust and accurate predictions and generalize to new patients and clinical sites. Three different out-of-sample validation schemes (10-fold cross-validation, leave-one-site-out cross-validation, and excluding a test set) were employed to assess generalizability based on three different statistical performance measures (mean squared error, Harrell's concordance statistic, and negative log-likelihood). Sensitivity to different choices of the priors, to the characteristics of the underlying patient population, and to the sample size, was assessed. Finally, it was shown that model predictions are clinically meaningful. Applying personalized predictive models in relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis patients is still new territory that is rapidly evolving and has many challenges. The proposed framework addresses the following challenges: robustness and accuracy of the predictions, generalizability to new patients and clinical sites and comparability of the predicted effectiveness of different therapies. The methodological and clinical soundness of the results builds the basis for a future support of patients and doctors when the current treatment is not generating the desired effect and they are considering a therapy switch. (A) The framework is developed using quality-proven real-world data of patients with relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis. Patients have heterogeneous individual characteristics and diverse disease profiles, indicated for example by variations in frequency of relapses and degree of disability. Longitudinal characteristics regarding disease history (e.g. number of previous relapses in the last 12 months) are extracted at the time of an intended therapy switch, i.e. at time point "Today" (left). All clinical parameters are captured in a standardized way (right). (B) The model predicts the course of the disease based on the observed data (panel A), and is able to account for the impact of various available therapies on chosen clinical endpoints. The resulting ranking of therapies has a dependency on patient characteristics, illustrated here by a different highest ranked therapy depending on the number of relapse in the previous 12 months. (C) The model is evaluated for various generalization properties. Compared to performance on the training set (gray) it is able to predict for new patients not part of the training set (red).Top: Prediction for new patients. Middle: Prediction for new clinical sites. Bottom: Prediction for different time windows. (D) In order to assess the clinical impact of the model, disease activity is compared between patients treated with the highest ranked therapy and those treated with any of the other therapies. Patients adhering to the highest ranked therapy are associated with a better disease outcome when compared to those who did not.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Personalized healthcare promises to successfully advance the treatment of heterogeneous neurological disorders such as relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis by addressing the caveats of traditional healthcare. This study presents a framework for personalized prediction of treatment response based on real-world data from the NeuroTransData network.
METHODS
A framework for personalized prediction of response to various treatments currently available for relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis patients was proposed. Two indicators of therapy effectiveness were used: number of relapses, and confirmed disability progression. The following steps were performed: (1) Data preprocessing and selection of predictors according to quality and inclusion criteria; (2) Implementation of hierarchical Bayesian generalized linear models for estimating treatment response; (3) Validation of the resulting predictive models based on several performance measures and routines, together with additional analyses that focus on evaluating the usability in clinical practice, such as comparing predicted treatment response with the empirically observed course of multiple sclerosis for different adherence profiles.
RESULTS
The results revealed that the predictive models provide robust and accurate predictions and generalize to new patients and clinical sites. Three different out-of-sample validation schemes (10-fold cross-validation, leave-one-site-out cross-validation, and excluding a test set) were employed to assess generalizability based on three different statistical performance measures (mean squared error, Harrell's concordance statistic, and negative log-likelihood). Sensitivity to different choices of the priors, to the characteristics of the underlying patient population, and to the sample size, was assessed. Finally, it was shown that model predictions are clinically meaningful.
CONCLUSIONS
Applying personalized predictive models in relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis patients is still new territory that is rapidly evolving and has many challenges. The proposed framework addresses the following challenges: robustness and accuracy of the predictions, generalizability to new patients and clinical sites and comparability of the predicted effectiveness of different therapies. The methodological and clinical soundness of the results builds the basis for a future support of patients and doctors when the current treatment is not generating the desired effect and they are considering a therapy switch. (A) The framework is developed using quality-proven real-world data of patients with relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis. Patients have heterogeneous individual characteristics and diverse disease profiles, indicated for example by variations in frequency of relapses and degree of disability. Longitudinal characteristics regarding disease history (e.g. number of previous relapses in the last 12 months) are extracted at the time of an intended therapy switch, i.e. at time point "Today" (left). All clinical parameters are captured in a standardized way (right). (B) The model predicts the course of the disease based on the observed data (panel A), and is able to account for the impact of various available therapies on chosen clinical endpoints. The resulting ranking of therapies has a dependency on patient characteristics, illustrated here by a different highest ranked therapy depending on the number of relapse in the previous 12 months. (C) The model is evaluated for various generalization properties. Compared to performance on the training set (gray) it is able to predict for new patients not part of the training set (red).Top: Prediction for new patients. Middle: Prediction for new clinical sites. Bottom: Prediction for different time windows. (D) In order to assess the clinical impact of the model, disease activity is compared between patients treated with the highest ranked therapy and those treated with any of the other therapies. Patients adhering to the highest ranked therapy are associated with a better disease outcome when compared to those who did not.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32028898
doi: 10.1186/s12874-020-0906-6
pii: 10.1186/s12874-020-0906-6
pmc: PMC7006411
doi:
Substances chimiques
Immunosuppressive Agents
0
Dimethyl Fumarate
FO2303MNI2
Fingolimod Hydrochloride
G926EC510T
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
24Références
Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2019 Apr;105(4):912-922
pubmed: 30178490
Neurology. 2018 Apr 24;90(17):777-788
pubmed: 29686116
Stat Methods Med Res. 2017 Jun;26(3):1182-1198
pubmed: 25698716
Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2018 May;52(3):362-368
pubmed: 29714575
Int J Mol Sci. 2016 Oct 17;17(10):
pubmed: 27763513
Mult Scler. 2018 Feb;24(2):96-120
pubmed: 29353550
Epidemiology. 2010 Jan;21(1):128-38
pubmed: 20010215
N Engl J Med. 2016 Dec 8;375(23):2293-2297
pubmed: 27959688
Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2002 Mar;67(3):187-94
pubmed: 11853944
Stat Med. 1996 Feb 28;15(4):361-87
pubmed: 8668867
Ther Adv Neurol Disord. 2015 Jan;8(1):3-13
pubmed: 25584069
Prog Neurobiol. 2017 May;152:114-130
pubmed: 26952809