Back

Fisher information matrix computation for joint longitudinal and survival models to support clinical study design and covariate effect assessment

Fayette, L.; Brendel, K.; Mentre, F.

2026-06-01 pharmacology and therapeutics
10.64898/2026.05.28.26354340 medRxiv
Show abstract

Joint modelling of longitudinal data using non-linear mixed effects models and time-to-event outcomes provides a suitable framework to account for informative censoring when estimating biomarker dynamics and quantifying event risk using covariates and longitudinal trajectories. Their usefulness in clinical research depends on data collection design, particularly to precisely estimate the association (link) parameter between longitudinal and survival processes. However, optimal design strategies have so far been addressed separately for longitudinal and survival endpoints and remain unexplored for joint models. We propose two Fisher Information Matrix (FIM) computation methods for joint models, relying on Monte-Carlo integration over observations combined with either Markov Chains Monte-Carlo or Adaptive Gaussian Quadrature to integrate random effects. Their accuracy is assessed against clinical trial simulations in an oncological example based on the HORIZON III study with a tumour-growth-survival model including discrete and continuous covariates. We apply these methods to quantify the impact of follow-up duration, sampling richness, sample size, and covariate distribution on parameter uncertainty and test power. In our example, longitudinal-parameter uncertainty is barely affected by follow-up duration or sampling richness, whereas survival-parameter uncertainty decreases substantially from 1-year to 2-year follow-up. The number of subjects needed (NSN) to achieve <15\% uncertainty on the link parameter is comparable for a 2-year rich design and a 3-year sparse design. Optimal covariate distributions are stable across designs and systematically improve test power, outperforming longer and richer but non-optimised designs. These FIM-based methods accurately predict uncertainty and test powers, enabling design evaluation and NSN computation for joint-model-based clinical studies.

Matching journals

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

1
Statistics in Medicine
40 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
18.8%
2
Biometrics
23 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
7.4%
3
Nature Communications
5641 papers in training set
Top 22%
7.4%
4
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 10%
6.8%
5
Clinical and Translational Science
22 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
5.2%
6
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 30%
5.2%
50% of probability mass above
7
BMC Medical Research Methodology
47 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
4.4%
8
eLife
5828 papers in training set
Top 29%
4.1%
9
npj Systems Biology and Applications
125 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
4.1%
10
BioData Mining
22 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.1%
11
Briefings in Bioinformatics
354 papers in training set
Top 3%
3.3%
12
Biostatistics
24 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.3%
13
PLOS Computational Biology
1863 papers in training set
Top 12%
2.2%
14
Frontiers in Pharmacology
111 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.9%
15
NeuroImage
903 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.7%
16
Journal of Biomedical Informatics
47 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.4%
17
Aging Cell
165 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.4%
18
The Annals of Applied Statistics
19 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.1%
19
Statistical Methods in Medical Research
11 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.9%
20
PeerJ
308 papers in training set
Top 11%
0.9%
21
Clinical Trials
11 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.6%
22
Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics
25 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.6%
23
Bioinformatics
1204 papers in training set
Top 9%
0.6%
24
npj Genomic Medicine
36 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.6%