Lifetime Data Analysis

, Volume 18, Issue 4, pp 446–469 | Cite as

Robust inference in discrete hazard models for randomized clinical trials



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.


Censoring Estimating equations Discrete survival endpoints Model misspecification Robust inference 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Abbott Laboratories (2005) Oncologic drugs advisory committee: briefing document for atrasentan (XinlayTM).
  2. Bennett S (1983) Analysis of survival data by the proportional odds model. Stat Med 2: 273–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Berridge DM, Whitehead J (1991) Analysis of failure time data with ordinal categories of response. Stat Med 10: 1703–1710CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 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
  5. Breslow N (1974) Covariance analysis of censored survival data. Biometrics 30: 89–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cox DR (1972) Regression models and life-tables. J R Stat Soc B (Methodological) 34: 187–220MATHGoogle Scholar
  7. Efron B (1977) The efficiency of Cox’s likelihood function for censored data. J Am Stat Assoc 72: 557–565MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Farewell V, Prentice R (1980) The approximation of partial likelihood with emphasis on case-control studies. Biometrika 67: 273MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. Gillen DL, Emerson S (2005) Information growth in a family of weighted logrank statistics under repeated analyses. Seq Anal 24: 1–22MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gillen DL, Emerson SS (2007) Nontransitivity in a class of weighted logrank statistics under nonproportional hazards. Stat Probab Lett 77: 123–130MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. ICH (2000) International conference on harmonisation—harmonised tripartite guideline: choice of control group and related issues in clinical trials, (E10), 22–24Google Scholar
  12. Irwin J (1949) The standard error of an estimate of expectational life. J Hyg 47: 188–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kalbfleisch J, Prentice R (2002) The statistical analysis of failure time data. Wiley Series in Probability and StatisticsGoogle Scholar
  14. Kalbfleisch JD, Lawless J (1991) Regression models for right truncated data with applications to AIDS incubation times and reporting lags. Statistica Sinica 1: 19–32MATHGoogle Scholar
  15. Karrison T (1987) Restricted mean life with adjustment for covariates. J Am Stat Assoc 82: 1169–1176MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Klein J, Moeschberger M (2003) Survival analysis: techniques for censored and truncated data. Springer,Google Scholar
  17. Liang KY, Zeger SL (1986) Longitudinal data analysis using generalized linear models. Biometrika 73: 13–22MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Prentice RL, Gloeckler LA (1978) Regression analysis of grouped survival data with application to breast cancer data. Biometrics 34: 57–67MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 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 issuesGoogle Scholar
  20. 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: 155–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Struthers CA, Kalbfleisch JD (1986) Misspecified proportional hazard models. Biometrika 73: 363–369MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Tsiatis AA (1982) Repeated significance testing for a general class of statistics used in censored survival analysis. J Am Stat Assoc 77: 855–861MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Xu R, O’Quigley J (2000) Estimating average regression effect under non-proportional hazards. Biostatistics 1: 423–439MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of StatisticsUniversity of CaliforniaIrvineUSA

Personalised recommendations