1 of 22

Causal diagrams for understanding when correlations doesn’t imply causation

Andy Stein

October 13, 2021

Translational Clinical Oncology

Pharmacometrics

2 of 22

Who am I? Andy Stein

  • Group: Pharmacometrics
  • What I do:
    • Support quantitative analysis of early clinical trials, with a focus on identifying the right dose.
  • My background:
    • Mechanical Engineering and Applied Mathematics
  • My passion:
    • Learning and bringing insights from other fields into drug development and vice versa (environmental modeling, managing uncertainty, parenting)

2

3 of 22

Motivation – the importance of finding the right dose of a drug

  • Tylenol helps to reduce pain and fever and is safe at daily doses ≤3,000 mg/day
  • >5,000 mg/day can cause liver damage
  • >10,000 mg/day can be lethal.
  • You can learn about safety and efficacy from clinical trials
  • Making best use of this data requires models to integrate the data

3

(paracetamol)

4 of 22

Understanding which factors to control for (age) is critical

4

5 of 22

Overview

  • Situation:
    • We use models relating drug concentration to response to guide drug development.
    • Models are useful when they describe a causal relationship
    • If relationships are only correlative relationship, they can lead to poor decisions
  • Question: How to assess whether a relationship is causal or just correlative?
  • Answer: Causal diagrams can help identify confounders
  • Outline
    • Introduce PKPD concepts and exposure-response modeling
    • Present two examples of exposure-response confounding
    • Introduce causal diagrams and their key structures
    • Conclude with COVID-19 example

5

6 of 22

The “PKPD” pathway of drug effect

6

Absorbed by intestines into blood

Distribute from blood into tissue

Binds target �in tissue

Effects

Oral Dose

Elimination

from body

Pharmacokinetics (PK):

How body affects drug

Pharmacodynamics (PD):

How drug affects body

Should children and adults receive the same dose?

What dose is needed to shrink a tumor without causing severe neutropenia

Drug Concentration

Measurement

7 of 22

Measuring PKPD

7

PK (Pharmacokinetics) example

Measurement of drug concentration from circulation

PD (Pharmacodynamics) example

Change in tumor size, as measured by X-Ray

Dose Regimen

  • amount given
  • frequency
  • method (oral, patch, etc.)

8 of 22

Understanding PKPD can help in picking the optimal dose regimen

8

From Rowland and Tozer

Drug doesn’t work

Drug is too toxic

9 of 22

Novartis was developing a PD-L1 Inhibitor. Other PD-L1 drugs on the market

  • Atezolizumab dosed at 1200 mg q3w
  • Our drug had similar properties to atezolizumab
  • Is 1200 mg q3w the right dose for us?

9

10 of 22

Higher exposure of atezolizumab correlates with better response

10

1

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0

Probability of Overall Response

AUCss (mg·day/ml)

= steady state drug conc. * 21 days

2 4 6 8 10 12

Atezolizumab, 1200 mg q3w

Only one dose tested

2nd Line Non Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC)

From Feb 2016 FDA Clin. Pharm. Review

 

11 of 22

Clearance decreases (and exposure increases) with improved response1-2

11

  1. Liu, Chao, et al. "Association of Time‐Varying Clearance of Nivolumab With Disease Dynamics and Its Implications on Exposure Response Analysis." Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics 101.5 (2017): 657-666.
  2. FDA Clin Pharm Review for atezolizumab in NSCLC (2016)
  3. Bajaj, G., et al. "Model‐based population pharmacokinetic analysis of nivolumab in patients with solid tumors." CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology 6.1 (2017): 58-66.

Complete Response

Partial Response

Stable Disease

Progressive Disease

 

Atezolizumab in NSCLC

(observed for most PD-1, PD-L1 inhibitors)

Cachexia in non-responders might lead to faster clearance of drug3

 

12 of 22

Exposure drives response AND response drives exposure

12

Exposure

Response

1

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0

Probability of Overall Response

AUCss (mg·day/ml)

2 4 6 8 10 12

Assumption

Dose

Reality

(sometimes)

Exposure

Response

Dose

13 of 22

Prognostic factors may also confound the analysis

13

Exposure

Response

Prognostic

Factors

- Patient health

- metastases

- cachexia

Assumption

Dose

Reality

(sometimes)

Exposure

Response

Dose

14 of 22

For trastuzumab in metastatic Gastric Cancer, exposure-OS relationship observed

14

  1. Yang, Jun, et al. "The combination of exposure‐response and case‐control analyses in regulatory decision making." The Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 53.2 (2013): 160-166.

Q1

Q2, Q3, Q4

Trough conc. at end of day 21 (model predicted)

15 of 22

Poor response at Q1 exposure was due to prognostic factors affecting both exposure and response1

Key prognostic factors

  • ECOG
  • Prior gastrectomy
  • # metastatic sites
  • Asian ethnicity
  • HER2 IHC score

15

Trastuzumab Q1

Control Arm Subset

Matched baseline char. to Q1 pts

Trastuzumab Q2-4

Control Arm Subset

Matched baseline char. to Q2-4 pts

  1. Yang, Jun, et al. "The combination of exposure‐response and case‐control analyses in regulatory decision making." The Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 53.2 (2013): 160-166.

16 of 22

Draw a causal graph of the �dose-exposure-biomarker-resp. relationship

16

17 of 22

Fork: �you must stratify by covariate, otherwise estimated E-R relationship will not be causal

17

Dose

Exposure

Response

Covariate

18 of 22

Mediators and Colliders: �you must not stratify by covariate, otherwise E-R will be confounded [these are post-baseline covariates]

18

Dose

Exposure

Response

Covariate

Dose

Exposure

Response

Covariate

Mediator

Collider

19 of 22

Feedback Loop:�You must think about the consequences of the feedback loop(s) and choose the appropriate analysis.

19

Dose

Exposure

Response

  1. https://arxiv.org/abs/1907.07271

Using dose or exposure only at day 1 help avoid confounding.�

20 of 22

COVID-19 example�

20

* Andy’s guess for upper level of quantification

Get

Vaccine

Hospitalization

Due to COVID-19

Age

  1. https://www.covid-datascience.com/post/israeli-data-how-can-efficacy-vs-severe-disease-be-strong-when-60-of-hospitalized-are-vaccinated�Israel data with Pfizer Vaccine, August 2021

Age Group

Percent vaxxed

Severe Cases

per 100k people

no vax

Vax

All Ages

78%

16

5.3

68%

12-15

30%

0.30

<0.01*

>97%*

16-19

74%

1.6

<0.01*

>99%*

20-29

76%

1.5

<0.01*

>99%*

30-39

81%

6.2

0.20

97%

40-49

84%

17

1.0

94%

50-59

88%

40

2.9

93%

60-69

90%

77

8.7

89%

70-79

95%

190

20

89%

80-89

93%

250

48

81%

90+

91%

510

39

92%

Reason for confounding: Older people are both more likely to be vaccinated and more likely to be hospitalized, irrespective of vaccination.

Age Group

Percent vaxxed

Severe Cases

per 100k people

no vax

Vax

All Ages

78%

16

5.3

68%

All Ages

78%

16

12-15

30%

0.30

16-19

74%

1.6

20-29

76%

1.5

30-39

81%

6.2

40-49

84%

17

50-59

88%

40

60-69

90%

77

70-79

95%

190

80-89

93%

250

90+

91%

510

21 of 22

Drug development is challenging because biology is so complex

  • Causal diagrams can help by identifying potentially confounding factors

21

Forks

Feedback Loops

22 of 22

Acknowledgements

  • Exposure-Response Guidance Team
    • Thomas Dumortier
    • Guenter Heimann
    • Yu-Yun Ho
    • Alison Margolskee
    • Oliver Sander
    • Marina Savelieva-Praz
    • Xinrui Zhang
  • Analytics colleagues
    • Mark Baille
    • Bjorn Bornkamp
    • Christian Bartels
  • External Colleague
    • Mike Perry

22