Advertisement

Lifetime Data Analysis

, Volume 19, Issue 1, pp 1–18 | Cite as

Evidence synthesis through a degradation model applied to myocardial infarction

  • Daniel CommengesEmail author
  • Boris P. Hejblum
Article

Abstract

We propose an evidence synthesis approach through a degradation model to estimate causal influences of physiological factors on myocardial infarction (MI) and coronary heart disease (CHD). For instance several studies give incidences of MI and CHD for different age strata, other studies give relative or absolute risks for strata of main risk factors of MI or CHD. Evidence synthesis of several studies allows incorporating these disparate pieces of information into a single model. For doing this we need to develop a sufficiently general dynamical model; we also need to estimate the distribution of explanatory factors in the population. We develop a degradation model for both MI and CHD using a Brownian motion with drift, and the drift is modeled as a function of indicators of obesity, lipid profile, inflammation and blood pressure. Conditionally on these factors the times to MI or CHD have inverse Gaussian (\({\mathcal{IG}}\)) distributions. The results we want to fit are generally not conditional on all the factors and thus we need marginal distributions of the time of occurrence of MI and CHD; this leads us to manipulate the inverse Gaussian normal distribution (\({\mathcal{IGN}}\)) (an \({\mathcal{IG}}\) whose drift parameter has a normal distribution). Another possible model arises if a factor modifies the threshold. This led us to define an extension of \({\mathcal{IGN}}\) obtained when both drift and threshold parameters have normal distributions. We applied the model to results published in five important studies of MI and CHD and their risk factors. The fit of the model using the evidence synthesis approach was satisfactory and the effects of the four risk factors were highly significant.

Keywords

Causality Causal inference Coronary heart disease Degradation model Epidemiology Evidence synthesis Inverse Gaussian distribution Myocardial infarction Stochastic processes 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aalen O, Borgan Ø, Gjessing H (2008) Survival and event history analysis: a process point of view. Springer, New YorkzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aalen OO, Gjessing HkK (2001) Understanding the shape of the hazard rate: a process point of view. Stat Sci 16(1): 1–22MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. Box GEP, Cox DR (1964) An analysis of transformations. J R Stat Soc 26(2): 211–252MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. Clayton D, Schifflers E (1987) Models for temporal variation in cancer rates. i: age–period and age–cohort models. Stat Med 6(4): 449–467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Commenges D (2012) The stochastic system approach to causality with a view toward lifecourse epidemiology. Arxiv preprint arXiv:12035728, 26 March 2012Google Scholar
  6. Commenges D, Gégout-Petit A (2009) A general dynamical statistical model with causal interpretation. J R Stat Soc 71(3): 719–736MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Doksum K, Normand S (1995) Gaussian models for degradation processes-part I: methods for the analysis of biomarker data. Lifetime Data Anal 1(2): 131–144MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Flint AJ, Hu FB, Glynn RJ, Caspard H, Manson JE, Willett WC, Rimm EB (2010) Excess weight and the risk of incident coronary heart disease among men and women. Obesity 18(2): 377–383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fosen J, Ferkingstad E, Borgan Ø, Aalen O (2006) Dynamic path analysis: a new approach to analyzing time-dependent covariates. Lifetime Data Anal 12(2): 143–167MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fox J, Weisberg S (2010) An R Companion to applied regression, 2nd edn. Sage Publications, LondonGoogle Scholar
  11. Freedman D (2006) On the so-called huber sandwich estimator and robust standard errors. Am Stat 60(4): 299–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gamborg M, Jensen G, Sørensen T, Andersen P (2011) Dynamic path analysis in life-course epidemiology. Am J Epidemiol 173(10): 1131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hansson G (2005) Inflammation, atherosclerosis, and coronary artery disease. New Engl J Med 352(16): 1685–1695CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hashemi R, Jacqmin-Gadda H, Commenges D (2003) A latent process model for joint modeling of events and marker. Lifetime Data Anal 9(4): 331–343MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Jiang W, Turnbull B (2004) The indirect method: inference based on intermediate statistics: a synthesis and examples. Stat Sci 19(2): 239–263MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kannel WB, Wilson PWF, Nam BH, D’Agostino RB (2002) Risk stratification of obesity as a coronary risk factor. Am J Cardiol 90(7): 697–701CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kowalski C (1970) The performance of some rough tests for bivariate normality before and after coordinate transformations to normality. Technometrics 12: 517–544MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lee MLT, Whitmore GA (2006) Threshold regression for survival analysis: modeling event times by a stochastic process reaching a boundary. Stat Sci 21(4): 501–513MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Liang K, Zeger S (1986) Longitudinal data analysis using generalized linear models. Biometrika 73(1): 13MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Marquardt DW (1963) An algorithm for least-squares estimation of nonlinear parameters. J Soc Ind Appl Math 11(2): 431–441MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. National Heart Lung and Blood Institute (2006) Incidence and prevalence: 2006 chart book on cardiovascular and lung diseases. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, BethesdaGoogle Scholar
  22. Nicholls SJ (2009) Relationship between LDL, HDL, blood pressure and atheroma progression in the coronaries. Curr Opin Lipidol 20(6): 491–496CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Pennell M, Whitmore G, Lee M (2010) Bayesian random-effects threshold regression with application to survival data with nonproportional hazards. Biostatistics 11(1): 111–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Presanis AM, De Angelis D, Goubar A, Gill ON, Ades AE (2011) Bayesian evidence synthesis for a transmission dynamic model for HIV among men who have sex with men. Biostatistics 12(4): 666–681CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Raftery A, Givens G, Zeh J (1995) Inference from a deterministic population dynamics model for bowhead whales. J Am Stat Assoc 90: 402–416zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Ridker PM, Cushman M, Stampfer MJ, Tracy RP, Hennekens CH (1997) Inflammation, aspirin, and the risk of cardiovascular disease in apparently healthy men. New Engl J Med 336(14): 973–979CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Sæbø S, Almøy T, Aastveit A (2005) Disease resistance modelled as first-passage times of genetically dependent stochastic processes. J R Stat Soc 54(1): 273–285CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Schweder T, Hjort N (1996) Bayesian synthesis or likelihood synthesis—what does borel’s paradox say?. Rep Int Whal Comm 46: 475–480Google Scholar
  29. Van der Vaart A (2000) Asymptotic statistics, 3rd edn. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  30. Van Houwelingen H, Arends L, Stijnen T (2004) Advanced methods in meta-analysis: multivariate approach and meta-regression. Tutor Biostat 2: 289Google Scholar
  31. Velilla S (1993) A note on the multivariate Box–Cox transformation to normality. Stat Probab Lett 17(4): 259–263MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Whitmore GA (1986) Normal-gamma mixtures of inverse Gaussian distributions. Scand J Stat 13(3): 211–220MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  33. Wilson PWF, D’Agostino RB, Levy D, Belanger AM, Silbershatz H, Kannel WB (1998) Prediction of coronary heart disease using risk factor categories. Circulation 97(18): 1837–1847CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Yeo IK, Johnson RA (2000) A new family of power transformations to improve normality or symmetry. Biometrika 87(4): 954–959MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.INSERM, ISPED, Centre INSERM U-897-Epidmilogie-BiostatistiqueBordeauxFrance
  2. 2.Universite Bordeaux 2, ISPED, Centre INSERM U-897-Epidmilogie-BiostatistiqueBordeauxFrance

Personalised recommendations