Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2024 Feb 1;9(6):1580-1589.
doi: 10.1016/j.ekir.2024.01.050. eCollection 2024 Jun.

Competing Risks Analysis of Kidney Transplant Waitlist Outcomes: Two Important Statistical Perspectives

Affiliations
Review

Competing Risks Analysis of Kidney Transplant Waitlist Outcomes: Two Important Statistical Perspectives

Jeffrey J Gaynor et al. Kidney Int Rep. .

Abstract

Modern competing risks analysis has 2 primary goals in clinical epidemiology as follows: (i) to maximize the clinician's knowledge of etiologic associations existing between potential predictor variables and various cause-specific outcomes via cause-specific hazard models, and (ii) to maximize the clinician's knowledge of noteworthy differences existing in cause-specific patient risk via cause-specific subdistribution hazard models (cumulative incidence functions [CIFs]). A perfect application exists in analyzing the following 4 distinct outcomes after listing for a deceased donor kidney transplant (DDKT): (i) receiving a DDKT, (ii) receiving a living donor kidney transplant (LDKT), (iii) waitlist removal due to patient mortality or a deteriorating medical condition, and (iv) waitlist removal due to other reasons. It is important to realize that obtaining a complete understanding of subdistribution hazard ratios (HRs) is simply not possible without first having knowledge of the multivariable relationships existing between the potential predictor variables and the cause-specific hazards (perspective #1), because the cause-specific hazards form the "building blocks" of CIFs. In addition, though we believe that a worthy and practical alternative to estimating the median waiting-time-to DDKT is to ask, "what is the conditional probability of the patient receiving a DDKT, given that he or she would not previously experience one of the competing events (known as the cause-specific conditional failure probability)," only an appropriate estimator of this conditional type of cumulative incidence should be used (perspective #2). One suggested estimator, the well-known "one minus Kaplan-Meier" approach (censoring competing events), simply does not represent any probability in the presence of competing risks and will almost always produce biased estimates (thus, it should never be used).

Keywords: cause-specific hazard rates; cause-specific waiting time-to-event distributions following kidney transplant waitlisting; conditional cumulative incidence; cumulative incidence; modern competing risks analysis.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
(a) Nonparametric cause-specific cumulative incidence curves for the whole cohort in Stewart et al. (based on “eyeballed” annual values from their Supplementary Figure S2). (b) Proper nonparametric cause-specific conditional cumulative incidence curves for the whole cohort in Stewart et al. CIF, cumulative incidence function; DDKT, deceased donor kidney transplant; LDKT, living donor kidney transplant.
Figure 2
Figure 2
(a) Nonparametric cause-specific Kaplan-Meier curves for the whole cohort in Hart et al. (based on “eyeballed” annual values from their Figure 1a). (b) Nonparametric cause-specific cumulative incidence curves for the whole cohort in Hart et al. (based on “eyeballed” annual values from their Figure 1b). (c) Nonparametric cause-specific 1 − Kaplan-Meier curves for the whole cohort in Hart et al. (d) Nonparametric cause-specific conditional cumulative incidence curves for the whole cohort in Hart et al. (e) Nonparametric cause-specific cumulative hazard curves for the whole cohort in Hart et al. CIF, cumulative incidence function; DDKT, deceased donor kidney transplant; LDKT, living donor kidney transplant.

Similar articles

References

    1. Cox D.R. Regression models and life tables. J R Stat Soc B. 1972;34:187–220. doi: 10.1111/j.2517-6161.1972.tb00899.x. - DOI
    1. Kalbfleisch J.D., Prentice R.L. 1st ed. John Wiley & Sons, Inc; New York, NY: 1980. The Statistical Analysis of Failure Time Data.
    1. Lawless J.F. 1st ed. John Wiley & Sons, Inc; New York, NY: 1982. Statistical Models and Methods for Lifetime Data.
    1. Gaynor J.J., Feuer E.J., Tan C.C., et al. On the use of cause-specific failure and conditional failure probabilities: examples from clinical oncology data. J Am Stat Assoc. 1993;88:400–409. doi: 10.1080/01621459.1993.10476289. - DOI
    1. Gooley T.A., Leisenring W., Crowley J., Storer B.E. Estimation of failure probabilities in the presence of competing risks: new representations of old estimators. Stat Med. 1999;18:695–706. doi: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0258(19990330)18:6<695::aid-sim60>3.0.co;2-o. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources