Estimating vaccine efficacy using auxiliary outcome data and a small validation sample
- 12 August 2004
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wiley in Statistics in Medicine
- Vol. 23 (17) , 2697-2711
- https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.1849
Abstract
In vaccine studies, a specific diagnosis of a suspected case by culture or serology of the infectious agent is expensive and difficult. Implementing validation sets in the study is less expensive and is easier to carry out. In studies using validation sets, the non-specific or auxiliary outcome is measured on each participant while the specific outcome is measured only for a small proportion of the participants. Vaccine efficacy, defined as one minus some measure of relative risk, could be severely attenuated if based only on the auxiliary outcome. Applying missing data analysis techniques could thus correct the bias while maintaining statistical efficiency. However, when the sample size in the validation sets is small and the vaccine is highly efficacious, all specific outcomes are likely to be negative in the validation set in the vaccinated group. Two commonly used missing data analysis methods, the mean score method and multiple imputation, depend on the ad hoc continuity correction when none of the specific outcomes are positive and the normality or log-normality assumption of relative risk, which may not hold when the relative risk is highly skewed, to estimate the confidence interval. In this paper, we propose a Bayesian method to estimate vaccine efficacy and its highest probability density (HPD) credible set using Monte Carlo (MC) methods when using auxiliary outcome data and a small validation sample. Comparing the performance of these approaches using data from a field study of influenza vaccine and simulations, we recommend to use the Bayesian method in this situation.Keywords
This publication has 21 references indexed in Scilit:
- Effects of pertussis vaccination on transmission: vaccine efficacy for infectiousnessVaccine, 2003
- Methods for Conducting Sensitivity Analysis of Trials with Potentially Nonignorable Competing Causes of CensoringBiometrics, 2001
- Monte Carlo Estimation of Bayesian Credible and HPD IntervalsJournal of Computational and Graphical Statistics, 1999
- Analysis of Longitudinal Binary Data from Multiphase SamplingJournal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology, 1998
- Semiparametric regression estimation in the presence of dependent censoringBiometrika, 1995
- Estimation of Regression Coefficients When Some Regressors are not Always ObservedJournal of the American Statistical Association, 1994
- Validation study methods for estimating exposure proportions and odds ratios with misclassified dataJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 1990
- Confidence Intervals for a Binomial Parameter after Observing No SuccessesThe American Statistician, 1981
- The Bayesian BootstrapThe Annals of Statistics, 1981
- A Generalization of Sampling Without Replacement from a Finite UniverseJournal of the American Statistical Association, 1952