Estimating and testing for center effects in competing risks
- PMID: 21341296
- DOI: 10.1002/sim.4132
Estimating and testing for center effects in competing risks
Abstract
The problems of fitting Gaussian frailties proportional hazards models for the subdistribution of a competing risk and of testing for center effects are considered. In the analysis of competing risks data, Fine and Gray proposed a proportional hazards model for the subdistribution to directly assess the effects of covariates on the marginal failure probabilities of a given failure cause. Katsahianbiet al. extended their model to clustered time to event data, by including random center effects or frailties in the subdistribution hazard. We first introduce an alternate estimation procedure to the one proposed by Katsahian et al. This alternate estimation method is based on the penalized partial likelihood approach often used in fitting Gaussian frailty proportional hazards models in the standard survival analysis context, and has the advantage of using standard survival analysis software. Second, four hypothesis tests for the presence of center effects are given and compared via Monte-Carlo simulations. Statistical and numerical considerations lead us to formulate pragmatic guidelines as to which of the four tests is preferable. We also illustrate the proposed methodology with registry data from bone marrow transplantation for acute myeloid leukemia (AML).
Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Similar articles
-
Analysing multicentre competing risks data with a mixed proportional hazards model for the subdistribution.Stat Med. 2006 Dec 30;25(24):4267-78. doi: 10.1002/sim.2684. Stat Med. 2006. PMID: 16960919
-
Cause-specific cumulative incidence estimation and the fine and gray model under both left truncation and right censoring.Biometrics. 2011 Mar;67(1):39-49. doi: 10.1111/j.1541-0420.2010.01420.x. Biometrics. 2011. PMID: 20377575
-
Proportional subdistribution hazards modeling offers a summary analysis, even if misspecified.Stat Med. 2010 Mar 30;29(7-8):875-84. doi: 10.1002/sim.3786. Stat Med. 2010. PMID: 20213713
-
Pseudo-observations in survival analysis.Stat Methods Med Res. 2010 Feb;19(1):71-99. doi: 10.1177/0962280209105020. Epub 2009 Aug 4. Stat Methods Med Res. 2010. PMID: 19654170 Review.
-
Multi-state models for event history analysis.Stat Methods Med Res. 2002 Apr;11(2):91-115. doi: 10.1191/0962280202SM276ra. Stat Methods Med Res. 2002. PMID: 12040698 Review.
Cited by
-
Methods for generating paired competing risks data.Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2016 Oct;135:199-207. doi: 10.1016/j.cmpb.2016.07.027. Epub 2016 Jul 25. Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2016. PMID: 27586491 Free PMC article.
-
Multilevel competing risk models to evaluate the risk of nosocomial infection.Crit Care. 2014 Apr 8;18(2):R64. doi: 10.1186/cc13821. Crit Care. 2014. PMID: 24713511 Free PMC article.
-
Testing for center effects on survival and competing risks outcomes using pseudo-value regression.Lifetime Data Anal. 2019 Apr;25(2):206-228. doi: 10.1007/s10985-018-9443-6. Epub 2018 Jul 5. Lifetime Data Anal. 2019. PMID: 29978275 Free PMC article.
-
Dipstick proteinuria and risk of myocardial infarction and all-cause mortality in diabetes or pre-diabetes: a population-based cohort study.Sci Rep. 2017 Sep 20;7(1):11986. doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-12057-4. Sci Rep. 2017. PMID: 28931849 Free PMC article.
-
Racial/Ethnic Disparities in Access and Outcomes of Simultaneous Liver-Kidney Transplant Among Liver Transplant Candidates With Renal Dysfunction in the United States.Transplantation. 2019 Aug;103(8):1663-1674. doi: 10.1097/TP.0000000000002574. Transplantation. 2019. PMID: 30720678 Free PMC article.