关于有限群的可解性

利用极大子群的几乎正规的概念得到了有限群为可解群的若干充要条件．     

反Fuzzy子群的直积

1990年R.Biswas在[2]中提出了反Fuzzy子群的概念.在此基础上本文相应定义了反Fuzzy子群的直积.接着讨论了其包括正规、共轭情况下的若干性质.此外,还给出了直积μ_1×μ_2是G×G上的反Fuzzy子群的一个充要条件.     

2阶子群均共轭置换的4p2及4pq阶群

子群H为G的共轭置换子群是指日满足对G中任意元素g均成立HgH=HHg，记为H〈c-pG．本文利用共轭置换来刻画2阶子群均共轭置换的有限群，得到具有该特性的4p2及4pg阶群的结构分类．     

Development of predictive signatures for treatment selection in precision medicine with survival outcomes

For survival endpoints in subgroup selection, a score conversion model is often used to convert the set of biomarkers for each patient into a univariate score and using the median of the univariate scores to divide the patients into biomarker‐positive and biomarker‐negative subgroups. However, this may lead to bias in patient subgroup identification regarding the 2 issues: (1) treatment is equally effective for all patients and/or there is no subgroup difference; (2) the median value of the univariate scores as a cutoff may be inappropriate if the sizes of the 2 subgroups are differ substantially. We utilize a univariate composite score method to convert the set of patient's candidate biomarkers to a univariate response score. We propose applying the likelihood ratio test (LRT) to assess homogeneity of the sampled patients to address the first issue. In the context of identification of the subgroup of responders in adaptive design to demonstrate improvement of treatment efficacy (adaptive power), we suggest that subgroup selection is carried out if the LRT is significant. For the second issue, we utilize a likelihood‐based change‐point algorithm to find an optimal cutoff. Our simulation study shows that type I error generally is controlled, while the overall adaptive power to detect treatment effects sacrifices approximately 4.5% for the simulation designs considered by performing the LRT; furthermore, the change‐point algorithm outperforms the median cutoff considerably when the subgroup sizes differ substantially.     

Model averaging for treatment effect estimation in subgroups

In many clinical trials, biological, pharmacological, or clinical information is used to define candidate subgroups of patients that might have a differential treatment effect. Once the trial results are available, interest will focus on subgroups with an increased treatment effect. Estimating a treatment effect for these groups, together with an adequate uncertainty statement is challenging, owing to the resulting “random high” / selection bias. In this paper, we will investigate Bayesian model averaging to address this problem. The general motivation for the use of model averaging is to realize that subgroup selection can be viewed as model selection, so that methods to deal with model selection uncertainty, such as model averaging, can be used also in this setting. Simulations are used to evaluate the performance of the proposed approach. We illustrate it on an example early‐phase clinical trial.     

Estimates of subgroup treatment effects in overall nonsignificant trials: To what extent should we believe in them?

In drug development, it sometimes occurs that a new drug does not demonstrate effectiveness for the full study population but appears to be beneficial in a relevant subgroup. In case the subgroup of interest was not part of a confirmatory testing strategy, the inflation of the overall type I error is substantial and therefore such a subgroup analysis finding can only be seen as exploratory at best. To support such exploratory findings, an appropriate replication of the subgroup finding should be undertaken in a new trial. We should, however, be reasonably confident in the observed treatment effect size to be able to use this estimate in a replication trial in the subpopulation of interest. We were therefore interested in evaluating the bias of the estimate of the subgroup treatment effect, after selection based on significance for the subgroup in an overall “failed” trial. Different scenarios, involving continuous as well as dichotomous outcomes, were investigated via simulation studies. It is shown that the bias associated with subgroup findings in overall nonsignificant clinical trials is on average large and varies substantially across plausible scenarios. This renders the subgroup treatment estimate from the original trial of limited value to design the replication trial. An empirical Bayesian shrinkage method is suggested to minimize this overestimation. The proposed estimator appears to offer either a good or a conservative correction to the observed subgroup treatment effect hence provides a more reliable subgroup treatment effect estimate for adequate planning of future studies.     

A simulation study of methods for selecting subgroup‐specific doses in phase 1 trials

Patient heterogeneity may complicate dose‐finding in phase 1 clinical trials if the dose‐toxicity curves differ between subgroups. Conducting separate trials within subgroups may lead to infeasibly small sample sizes in subgroups having low prevalence. Alternatively,it is not obvious how to conduct a single trial while accounting for heterogeneity. To address this problem,we consider a generalization of the continual reassessment method on the basis of a hierarchical Bayesian dose‐toxicity model that borrows strength between subgroups under the assumption that the subgroups are exchangeable. We evaluate a design using this model that includes subgroup‐specific dose selection and safety rules. A simulation study is presented that includes comparison of this method to 3 alternative approaches,on the basis of nonhierarchical models,that make different types of assumptions about within‐subgroup dose‐toxicity curves. The simulations show that the hierarchical model‐based method is recommended in settings where the dose‐toxicity curves are exchangeable between subgroups. We present practical guidelines for application and provide computer programs for trial simulation and conduct.     

Methods for exploring treatment effect heterogeneity in subgroup analysis: an application to global clinical trials

Multi‐country randomised clinical trials (MRCTs) are common in the medical literature, and their interpretation has been the subject of extensive recent discussion. In many MRCTs, an evaluation of treatment effect homogeneity across countries or regions is conducted. Subgroup analysis principles require a significant test of interaction in order to claim heterogeneity of treatment effect across subgroups, such as countries in an MRCT. As clinical trials are typically underpowered for tests of interaction, overly optimistic expectations of treatment effect homogeneity can lead researchers, regulators and other stakeholders to over‐interpret apparent differences between subgroups even when heterogeneity tests are insignificant. In this paper, we consider some exploratory analysis tools to address this issue. We present three measures derived using the theory of order statistics, which can be used to understand the magnitude and the nature of the variation in treatment effects that can arise merely as an artefact of chance. These measures are not intended to replace a formal test of interaction but instead provide non‐inferential visual aids, which allow comparison of the observed and expected differences between regions or other subgroups and are a useful supplement to a formal test of interaction. We discuss how our methodology differs from recently published methods addressing the same issue. A case study of our approach is presented using data from the Study of Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes (PLATO), which was a large cardiovascular MRCT that has been the subject of controversy in the literature. An R package is available that implements the proposed methods. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

两个有限群子群指数之集相等的几个充分条件

讨论了子群指数之集的性质以及给出了两个有限群子群指数之集相等的充分条件.     

给定西洛子群的正规化子与有限群的结构

探讨了群G的Sylowp-子群和Sylowq-子群的正规化子是超可解群(幂零群),且研究了在G中的指数是素数的幂的{p,q}-可解群G的结构.