Abstract
Radiological imaging has been used as an integrated part of modern clinical trials for patient selection, safety monitoring, and measuring treatment efficacy . Before we use quantitative measures, also called markers, derived from imaging in trials, we need to establish their scientific relevance (validity), as well as clinical utility and analytic validity. Clinical utility can be demonstrated in saving time and/or cost. Analytic validity can be demonstrated for measurement consistency over time and across participating sites. This chapter discusses two statistical applications in imaging clinical trials related to these utilities. The first example (Sect. 11.2) was motivated by whether to use imaging surrogate marker in phase II oncology trials. The second example (Sect. 11.3) was motivated by monitoring longitudinal performance of dual X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scanner performance in pediatric trials. They were from my lecture in XV BASS on November 14, 2008, in Sylvania, Georgia, USA, which has not been published elsewhere.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Alonso, A., Molenberghs, G., Geys, H., Buyse, M., & Vangeneugden, T. (2006). A unifying approach for surrogate marker validation based on Prentice’s criteria. Statistics in Medicine, 25(2), 205–221.
Engelke, K., & Glüer, C. C. (2006). Quality and performance measures in bone densitometry. Part 1: Errors and diagnosis. Osteoporosis International, 17(9), 1283–1292.
Hillman, B. J. (2005). ACRIN—Lessions learned in conducting multi-center trials of imaging and cancer. Cancer Imaging, 5, Spec No A:S97-101. PMID: 16361142.
Kalender, W. A., Felsenberg, D., Genant, H. K., Fischer, M., Dequeker, J., & Reeve, J. (1995). The European Spine Phantom—A tool for standardization and quality control in spinal bone mineral measurements by DXA and QCT. European Journal of Radiology, 20(2), 83–92.
Keshavan, A., Paul, F., Beyer, M. K., et al. (2016). Power estimestimationatino for non-standardized multisite studies. Neuroimage, 134, 281–294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2016.03.051. Epub 2016 Apr 1.
Krueger, D., Libber, J., Sanfilippo, J., Yu, H.J., Horvath, B., Miller, C. G., et al. (2016) A DXA whole body composition cross-calibration experience: Evaluation with humans, spine, and whole body phantoms. Journal of Clinical Densitometry, 19(2), 220–225.
Lu, Y., Mathur, A. K., Blunt, B. A., Gluer, C. C., Will, A. S., Fuerst, T. P., et al. (1996). Dual X-ray absorptiometry quality control: Comparison of visual examination and process-control charts. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research, 11(5), 626–637.
Lu, Y., & Zhao, S. (2015). Statistics used in quality control, quality assurance, and quality improvement in radiological studies. In Y. Lu, J. Fang, L. Tian, & H. Jin (Eds.), Advanced medical statistics (pp. 103–160). New York: World Scientific.
Lu, Y., Zhao, S., Fan, B., & Shepherd, J. (2006). Simultaneous process control charts for BMD, BMC, and Area in longitudinal quality control of DXA scanners. In 15th International Bone Densitometry Workshop, Kyoto, Japan, Oct 2006.
Lu, Y., Zhao, S., Fan, B., & Shepherd, J. (2007) A new CUSUM method for simultaneous quality control of BMD, BMC, and Area for DXA scanners. In 29th Annual Meeting of American Society of Bone and Mineral Research, Honolulu, Hawaii, USA, 2007.
Mongomery, D. C. (2012). Introduction to statistical quality control (7th ed.). New York: Wiley.
Njeh, C. F., Richards, A., Boivin, C. M., Hans, D., Fuerst, T., & Genant, H. (1999). Factors influencing the speed of sound through the proximal phalanges. Journal of Clinical Densitometry, 2(3), 241–249.
No authors listed. (1948). STREPTOMYCIN treatment of pulmonary tuberculosis. British Medical Journal, 2, 24.
Prentice, R. L. (1989). Surrogate endpoints in clinical trials: Definition and operational criteria. Statistics in Medicine, 8, 431–440.
Rodriguez, R. N., & Ransdell, B. (2010). Statistical process control for heath care quality improvement using SAS/QRobert N. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc.
Schatzkin, A. (2000). Intermediate markers as surrogate endpoints in cancer research. Hematology/Oncology Clinics of North America, 14(4), 887–905.
Shepherd, J. A., & Lu, Y. (2007). A generalized least significant change for individuals measured on different DXA systems. Journal of Clinical Densitometry, 10(3), 249–258.
Thomas, A. M. K., & Banerjee, A. K. (2013). History of radiology: Oxford medical history. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Zhao, Q., et al. (2010). A statistical method (cross-validation) for bone loss region detection after spaceflight. Australasian Physical and Engineering Sciences in Medicine, 33(2), 163–169. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13246-010-0024-6. Epub 2010 Jul 15.
Acknowledgements
I would like to make acknowledgment of contributions of my colleagues and funding supports. The bivariate QC was a joint work by Drs. John Shepherd, Shoujun Zhao, and Bo Fan at the Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco. That part of work was supported by a grant from CDC 200-2005-11219 (PI: Dr. Shepherd). The first part of utility of surrogate endpoints was supported by a grant from NIH R01 EB004079-01 (PI: Lu). The work was performed when author worked at the University of California, San Francisco.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Lu, Y. (2018). Statistical Considerations for Quantitative Imaging Measures in Clinical Trials. In: Peace, K., Chen, DG., Menon, S. (eds) Biopharmaceutical Applied Statistics Symposium . ICSA Book Series in Statistics. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-7820-0_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-7820-0_11
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-10-7819-4
Online ISBN: 978-981-10-7820-0
eBook Packages: Mathematics and StatisticsMathematics and Statistics (R0)