Estimates of clinically useful measures in competing risks survival analysis

Statistics in Medicine

Volumn 27, Issue 30, 2008, Pages 6407-6425

  Ambrogi, Federico ^a   Biganzoli, Elia ^a,b   Boracchi, Patrizia ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MILAN   (Italy)

^b NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE   (Italy)

Author keywords

Clinically useful measures; Competing risks; Generalized estimating equations; Pseudo values

Indexed keywords

DIETHYLSTILBESTROL; ESTROGEN;

ARTICLE; AXILLA; BREAST TUMOR; CAUSE OF DEATH; FEMALE; HUMAN; LYMPH NODE METASTASIS; LYMPHADENECTOMY; MALE; METASTASIS; METHODOLOGY; MORTALITY; PATHOLOGY; PROGNOSIS; PROSTATE TUMOR; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; RISK; STATISTICAL MODEL; SURVIVAL; TUMOR RECURRENCE;

AXILLA; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CAUSE OF DEATH; DIETHYLSTILBESTROL; ESTROGENS, NON-STEROIDAL; FEMALE; HUMANS; LYMPH NODE EXCISION; LYMPHATIC METASTASIS; MALE; MODELS, STATISTICAL; NEOPLASM METASTASIS; NEOPLASM RECURRENCE, LOCAL; PROGNOSIS; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; RISK; SURVIVAL ANALYSIS;

EID: 63249127387     PISSN: 02776715     EISSN: 10970258     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sim.3455     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Kay R. Treatment effects in competing-risks analysis of prostate cancer. Biometrics 1986; 42:203-211.
2. Klein JP. Modelling competing risks in cancer studies. Statistics in Medicine 2006; 25:1015-1034.
3. Demicheli R, Biganzoli E, Boracchi P, Greco M, Hrushesky WJ, Retsky MW. Allometric scaling law questions the traditional mechanical model for axillary lymph node involvement in breast cancer. Journal of Clinical Oncology 2006; 27:4391-4396.
4. Fine JP, Gray RJ. A proportional hazards model for the subdistribution of a competing risk. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1999; 94:496-509.
5. Scheike T. A flexible semiparametric transformation model for survival data. Lifetime Data Analysis 2006; 12:461-480.
6. Gray RJ. cmprsk: Subdistribution Analysis of Competing Risks, 2004. Available from: http://biowww.dfci. harvard.edu/~gray, r package version 2.1-5.
7. Fine JP. Analysing competing risks data with transformation models. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B 1999; 61(4):817-830.
8. Fine JP. Regression modeling of competing crude failure probabilities. Biostatistics 2001; 2:85-97.
9. Klein JP, Andersen PK. Regression modeling of competing risks data based on pseudovalues of the cumulative incidence function. Biometrics 2005; 61:223-229.
10. Scheike TH, Zhang MJ, Gerds TA. Predicting cumulative incidence probability by direct binomial regression. Biometrika 2008; 95:205-220.
11. Laupacis A, Sackett DL, Roberts RS. An assessment of clinically useful measures of the consequences of treatment. The New England Journal of Medicine 1988; 318:1728-1733.
12. Boracchi P, Mezzanotte G, Mariani L, Valagussa P, Marubini E. Clinically useful measures to assess the effectiveness of treatments: hints for a proper choice with special emphasis on cancer research. Tumori 1990; 76:1-9.
13. Jaeschke R, Guyatt G, Shannon H, Walter S, Cook D, Heddle N. Basic statistics for clinicians: 3. Assessing the effects of treatment: measures of association. Canadian Medical Association Journal 1995; 152:351-357.
14. DiCenso A. Clinically useful measures of the effects of treatment. Evidence Based Nursing 2001; 4:36-39.
15. Case LD, Kimmick G, Paskett ED, Lohman K, Tucker R. Interpreting measures of treatment effect in cancer clinical trials. Oncologist 2002; 7:181-187.
16. Wacholder S. Binomial regression in glim: estimating risk ratios and risk differences. American Journal of Epidemiology 1986; 123:174-184.
17. Barros AJ, Hirakata VN. Alternatives for logistic regression in cross-sectional studies: an empirical comparison of models that directly estimate the prevalence ratio. BMC Medical Research Methodology 2003; 21:203.
18. McNutt LA, Wu C, Xue X, Hafner JP. Estimating the relative risk in cohort studies and clinical trials of common outcome. American Journal of Epidemiology 2003; 157:940-943.
19. Spiegelman D, Hertzmark E. Easy SAS calculations for risk or prevalence ratios and differences. American Journal of Epidemiology 2005; 162:199-200.
20. Lumley T, Kronmal R, Ma S. Relative risk regression in medical research: models, contrasts, estimators and algorithms. UW Biostatistics Working Papers, 2006. Available from: http://www.bepress.com.
21. Greenland S. Model-based estimation of relative risks and other epidemiologic measures in studies of common outcomes and in case-control studies. American Journal of Epidemiology 2004; 160:301-305.
22. Hardin JW, Hilbe JM. Generalized Linear Models and Extensions (2nd edn). Stata Press: College Station, Texas, 2007.
23. R Development Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria, 2008. Available from: URL http://www.R-project.org.
24. Byar DP, Green SB. The choice of treatment for cancer patients based on covariate information: application to prostate cancer. Bulletin du Cancer 1980; 67:477-490.
25. Querzoli P, Pedriali M, Rinaldi R, Lombardi A, Biganzoli E, Boracchi P, Ferretti S, Frasson C, Zanella C, Ghisellini S. Axillary lymph node nanometastases are prognostic factors for disease-free survival and metastatic relapse in breast cancer patients. Clinical Cancer Research 2006; 12:6696-6701.
26. Uter W, Pfahlberg A. The concept of attributable risk in epidemiological practice. Biometrical Journal 1999; 8:985-993.
27. Gray RJ. A class of k-sample tests for comparing the cumulative incidence of a competing risk. Annals of Statistics 1988; 16:1141-1154.
28. Cheng S, Wei L, Ying Z. Analysis of transformation models with censored data. Biometrika 1995; 82:835-845.
29. Cheng SC, Fine JP, Wei LJ. Prediction of cumulative incidence function under the proportional hazards model. Biometrics 1998; 54:219-228.
30. Andersen PK, Klein JP, Rosthøj S. Generalized linear models for correlated pseudo-observations, with applications to multi-state models. Biometrika 2003; 90:15-27.
31. Klein JP, Gerster M, Andersen PK, Tarima S, Perme MP. SAS and R functions to compute pseudo-values for censored data regression. Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine 2008; 89:289-300.
32. Altman DG. Confidence intervals for the number needed to treat. British Medical Journal 1998; 317:1309-1312.
33. Hutton JL. Number needed to treat: properties and problems. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A 2000; 163:381-402.
34. Bender R. Calculating confidence intervals for the number needed to treat. Controlled Clinical Trials 2001; 22:102-110.
35. Harrell FJ. Hmisc: Harrell Miscellaneous, 2006. Available from: http://biostat.mc.vanderbilt.edu/s/Hmisc, r package version 3.1-2, with contributions from many other users.
36. Harrell FJ. Design: Design Package, 2007. Available from: http://biostat.mc.vanderbilt.edu/s/Design http://biostat. mc. vanderbilt.edu/rms, r package version 2.1-1.
37. Carey VJ. gee: Generalized Estimation Equation Solver, 2006. R package version 4.13-11, ported to R by Thomas Lumley (versions 3.13 and 4.4) and Brian Ripley (version 4.13).
38. CA. Absolute numbers best for discussing treatment options. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians 2004; 54:123-124.
39. Wieand HS. Is relative risk reduction a useful measure for patients or families who must choose a method of treatment? Journal of Clinical Oncology 2003; 21:4263-4264.
40. Leung DY, French JK. End points in clinical trials: are they moving the goalposts? Heart 2006; 92:870-872.
41. Altman DG, Andersen PK. Calculating the number needed to treat for trials where the outcome is time to an event. British Medical Journal 1999; 319:1492-1495.
42. Evans SR, Li L. A comparison of goodness of fit tests for the logistic gee model. Statistics in Medicine 2005; 24:1245-1261.
43. Gerster M, Perme MP. Pseudo: Pseudo-observations, 2008. R package version 1.0.