An explainable machine learning-based phenomapping strategy for adaptive predictive enrichment in randomized clinical trials.

Pubmed ID: 38001154

Pubmed Central ID: PMC10673945

Journal: NPJ digital medicine

Publication Date: Nov. 25, 2023

Grants: UL1 TR001863, K23 HL153775, F32 HL170592, U01 NS044876

Authors: Krumholz HM, Ross JS, Bhatt DL, Khera R, Oikonomou EK, Suchard MA, Thangaraj PM, Young LH

Cite As: Oikonomou EK, Thangaraj PM, Bhatt DL, Ross JS, Young LH, Krumholz HM, Suchard MA, Khera R. An explainable machine learning-based phenomapping strategy for adaptive predictive enrichment in randomized clinical trials. NPJ Digit Med 2023 Nov 25;6(1):217.

Studies:

Abstract

Randomized clinical trials (RCT) represent the cornerstone of evidence-based medicine but are resource-intensive. We propose and evaluate a machine learning (ML) strategy of adaptive predictive enrichment through computational trial phenomaps to optimize RCT enrollment. In simulated group sequential analyses of two large cardiovascular outcomes RCTs of (1) a therapeutic drug (pioglitazone versus placebo; Insulin Resistance Intervention after Stroke (IRIS) trial), and (2) a disease management strategy (intensive versus standard systolic blood pressure reduction in the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT)), we constructed dynamic phenotypic representations to infer response profiles during interim analyses and examined their association with study outcomes. Across three interim timepoints, our strategy learned dynamic phenotypic signatures predictive of individualized cardiovascular benefit. By conditioning a prospective candidate's probability of enrollment on their predicted benefit, we estimate that our approach would have enabled a reduction in the final trial size across ten simulations (IRIS: -14.8% ± 3.1%, p<sub>one-sample t-test</sub> = 0.001; SPRINT: -17.6% ± 3.6%, p<sub>one-sample t-test</sub> &lt; 0.001), while preserving the original average treatment effect (IRIS: hazard ratio of 0.73 ± 0.01 for pioglitazone vs placebo, vs 0.76 in the original trial; SPRINT: hazard ratio of 0.72 ± 0.01 for intensive vs standard systolic blood pressure, vs 0.75 in the original trial; all simulations with Cox regression-derived p value of  &lt; 0.01 for the effect of the intervention on the respective primary outcome). This adaptive framework has the potential to maximize RCT enrollment efficiency.