Back

Testing and Estimating Causal Treatment Effect Heterogeneity in Observational Studies via Revised Deep Semiparametric Regression: A Lung Transplant Case Study

Yuan, S.; Zou, F.; Zou, B.

2026-04-15 bioinformatics
10.64898/2026.04.13.718254 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Lung transplantation programs must decide when bilateral lung transplantation (BLT) offers meaningful functional benefit over single lung transplantation (SLT). Because donor and recipient characteristics jointly shape outcomes, the BLT-SLT contrast may differ across patients. However, analyzing observational registries poses a statistical challenge: apparent subgroup differences can be artifacts of complex confounding, while true heterogeneity can be missed or poorly quantified. Using a large national registry, we investigate whether the BLT effect varies across recipients and identify clinically relevant profiles of benefit using post-transplant lung function measured by forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1). We develop deepHTL, a framework that tests for treatment effect heterogeneity and estimates how the BLT-SLT effect varies with patient features. In extensive simulations designed to resemble registry-like confounding, deepHTL controls false positives for detecting heterogeneity and yields more accurate individualized effect estimates than common machine learning methods. In the lung transplant cohort, we find strong evidence of heterogeneity in the BLT-SLT effect on FEV1: younger, lower risk recipients with better baseline status show the largest FEV1 gains from BLT, whereas older, higher risk candidates exhibit diminished marginal benefit. These findings provide statistically grounded guidance for patient selection and allocation of scarce donor organs.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 4%
12.4%
2
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 14%
12.3%
3
Cell Systems
167 papers in training set
Top 1%
10.0%
4
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 19%
6.3%
5
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 29%
6.3%
6
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 10%
3.6%
50% of probability mass above
7
Science Advances
1098 papers in training set
Top 10%
2.6%
8
Bioinformatics
1061 papers in training set
Top 7%
2.1%
9
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
61 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.1%
10
Nature Biomedical Engineering
42 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.9%
11
Communications Biology
886 papers in training set
Top 9%
1.7%
12
American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine
39 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.7%
13
Nature Medicine
117 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
14
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 45%
1.5%
15
Nature Genetics
240 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.5%
16
The American Journal of Human Genetics
206 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.5%
17
Nature Machine Intelligence
61 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.3%
18
Science
429 papers in training set
Top 16%
1.3%
19
Clinical Infectious Diseases
231 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.3%
20
npj Digital Medicine
97 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.9%
21
Statistics in Medicine
34 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.9%
22
Nature
575 papers in training set
Top 15%
0.8%
23
Briefings in Bioinformatics
326 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.8%
24
Genome Medicine
154 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.7%
25
JCI Insight
241 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.7%
26
Biometrics
22 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.7%
27
Nature Methods
336 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.7%
28
Cancer Cell
38 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
29
Advanced Science
249 papers in training set
Top 20%
0.7%
30
PLOS Digital Health
91 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.6%