Skip to main content
Log in

Robust inference in discrete hazard models for randomized clinical trials

  • Published:
Lifetime Data Analysis Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Time-to-event data in which failures are only assessed at discrete time points are common in many clinical trials. Examples include oncology studies where events are observed through periodic screenings such as radiographic scans. When the survival endpoint is acknowledged to be discrete, common methods for the analysis of observed failure times include the discrete hazard models (e.g., the discrete-time proportional hazards and the continuation ratio model) and the proportional odds model. In this manuscript, we consider estimation of a marginal treatment effect in discrete hazard models where the constant treatment effect assumption is violated. We demonstrate that the estimator resulting from these discrete hazard models is consistent for a parameter that depends on the underlying censoring distribution. An estimator that removes the dependence on the censoring mechanism is proposed and its asymptotic distribution is derived. Basing inference on the proposed estimator allows for statistical inference that is scientifically meaningful and reproducible. Simulation is used to assess the performance of the presented methodology in finite samples.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abbott Laboratories (2005) Oncologic drugs advisory committee: briefing document for atrasentan (XinlayTM). http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/05/briefing/2005-4174B1_01_01-Abbott-Xinlay.pdf

  • Bennett S (1983) Analysis of survival data by the proportional odds model. Stat Med 2: 273–277

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berridge DM, Whitehead J (1991) Analysis of failure time data with ordinal categories of response. Stat Med 10: 1703–1710

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boyd AP, Kittelson JM, Gillen DL (2012) Estimation of treatment effect under non-proportional hazards and conditionally independent censoring. Stat Med. doi:10.1002/sim.5440

  • Breslow N (1974) Covariance analysis of censored survival data. Biometrics 30: 89–99

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cox DR (1972) Regression models and life-tables. J R Stat Soc B (Methodological) 34: 187–220

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Efron B (1977) The efficiency of Cox’s likelihood function for censored data. J Am Stat Assoc 72: 557–565

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Farewell V, Prentice R (1980) The approximation of partial likelihood with emphasis on case-control studies. Biometrika 67: 273

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Gillen DL, Emerson S (2005) Information growth in a family of weighted logrank statistics under repeated analyses. Seq Anal 24: 1–22

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Gillen DL, Emerson SS (2007) Nontransitivity in a class of weighted logrank statistics under nonproportional hazards. Stat Probab Lett 77: 123–130

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • ICH (2000) International conference on harmonisation—harmonised tripartite guideline: choice of control group and related issues in clinical trials, (E10), 22–24

  • Irwin J (1949) The standard error of an estimate of expectational life. J Hyg 47: 188–189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kalbfleisch J, Prentice R (2002) The statistical analysis of failure time data. Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics

  • Kalbfleisch JD, Lawless J (1991) Regression models for right truncated data with applications to AIDS incubation times and reporting lags. Statistica Sinica 1: 19–32

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Karrison T (1987) Restricted mean life with adjustment for covariates. J Am Stat Assoc 82: 1169–1176

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Klein J, Moeschberger M (2003) Survival analysis: techniques for censored and truncated data. Springer,

  • Liang KY, Zeger SL (1986) Longitudinal data analysis using generalized linear models. Biometrika 73: 13–22

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Prentice RL, Gloeckler LA (1978) Regression analysis of grouped survival data with application to breast cancer data. Biometrics 34: 57–67

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Robins JM, Rotnitzky A (1992) Recovery of information and adjustment for dependent censoring using surrogate markers. In: Jewell N, Dietz K, Farewell V (eds) AIDS epidemiology—methodological issues

  • Singer JD, Willett JB (1993) Its about time: Using discrete-time survival analysis to study duration and the timing of events. J Educ Behav Stat 18: 155–195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Struthers CA, Kalbfleisch JD (1986) Misspecified proportional hazard models. Biometrika 73: 363–369

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Tsiatis AA (1982) Repeated significance testing for a general class of statistics used in censored survival analysis. J Am Stat Assoc 77: 855–861

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Xu R, O’Quigley J (2000) Estimating average regression effect under non-proportional hazards. Biostatistics 1: 423–439

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Vinh Q. Nguyen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Nguyen, V.Q., Gillen, D.L. Robust inference in discrete hazard models for randomized clinical trials. Lifetime Data Anal 18, 446–469 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10985-012-9224-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10985-012-9224-6

Keywords

Navigation