In investigations of the effect of treatment on outcome, the propensity score is a tool to eliminate imbalance in the distribution of confounding variables between treatment groups. Recent work has suggested that Super Learner, an ensemble method, outperforms logistic regression in nonlinear settings; however, experience with real‐data analyses tends to show overfitting of the propensity score model using this approach. We investigated a wide range of simulated settings of varying complexities including simulations based on real data to compare the performances of logistic regression, generalized boosted models, and Super Learner in providing balance and for estimating the average treatment effect via propensity score regression, propensity score matching, and inverse probability of treatment weighting. We found that Super Learner and logistic regression are comparable in terms of covariate balance, bias, and mean squared error (MSE); however, Super Learner is computationally very expensive thus leaving no clear advantage to the more complex approach. Propensity scores estimated by generalized boosted models were inferior to the other two estimation approaches. We also found that propensity score regression adjustment was superior to either matching or inverse weighting when the form of the dependence on the treatment on the outcome is correctly specified.
Cancers treated by transplantation are often curative, but immunosuppressive drugs are required to prevent and (if needed) to treat graft-versus-host disease. Estimation of an optimal adaptive treatment strategy when treatment at either one of two stages of treatment may lead to a cure has not yet been considered. Using a sample of 9563 patients treated for blood and bone cancers by allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation drawn from the Center for Blood and Marrow Transplant Research database, we provide a case study of a novel approach to Q-learning for survival data in the presence of a potentially curative treatment, and demonstrate the results differ substantially from an implementation of Q-learning that fails to account for the cure-rate.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.