Advertisement

Survival Analysis II

  • James J. DignamEmail author
Living reference work entry
  • 11 Downloads

Abstract

Survival analysis modeling is integral to clinical trial analysis, as even in well-designed randomized trials where the primary inference is to be based on fundamental quantities such as estimated survival distributions and nonparametric tests, survival models offer additional insights and succinct treatment effect summaries. The ubiquitous Cox proportional hazards model has numerous variations and extensions to fit specific analytic needs and has become a mainstay of biomedical and clinical trial data analysis. However, other models and treatment effect metrics are increasingly available and should be adopted in cases where model assumptions are not met.

A natural extension of survival analysis pertains to the case where multiple potential causes of failure may be in effect. When these causes of failure are mutually exclusive, then competing risks observations are encountered, while in other cases, there may be multiple failures per individual. Methods that address these extensions of time to event data are needed to (a) assess of value of treatment in the presence of events that may preclude observation of the disease process of interest, (b) evaluate risks and benefits of treatment in a way that reflects patient experience, and (c) provide tools for study of factors related to different failure types and model more complex multi-event failure processes.

Keywords

Survival modeling Hazard regression Proportional hazards Competing risks Cause-specific hazard Subdistribution hazard Cumulative incidence 

References

  1. Aalen O (1978a) Nonparametric estimation of partial transition probabilities in multiple decrement models. Ann Stat 6:534–545MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aalen O (1978b) Nonparametric inference for a family of counting processes. Ann Stat 6:701–726MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Andersen PK, Borgan O, Gill R, Keiding N (1993) Statistical methods based on counting processes. Springer, BerlinzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Benichou J, Gail MH (1990) Estimates of absolute cause-specific risk in cohort studies. Biometrics 46:813–826CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bryant J, Dignam JJ (2004) Semiparametric models for cumulative incidence functions. Biometrics 60:182–190MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Buckner J, Shaw EG, Pugh S et al (2016) Radiation plus procarbazine, CCNU, and vincristine in low-grade glioma. N Engl J Med 374:1344–1355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Byar D, Huse R, Bailar JC et al (1974) An exponential model relating censored survival data and concomitant information for prostatic cancer patients. J Natl Cancer Inst 52:321–326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chang IM, Gelman R, Pagano M (1982) Corrected group prognostic curves and summary statistics. J Chronic Dis 35:669–674CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cheng SC, Fine JP, Wei LJ (1998) Prediction of cumulative incidence function under the proportional hazards model. Biometrics 54:219–228MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cox DR (1959) The analysis of exponentially distributed life-times with two types of failure. J Roy Stat Soc B 21:411–421MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. Cox DR (1972) Regression models and life tables. J Roy Stat Soc B 34:187–220MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. Cox DR (1975) Partial likelihood. Biometrika 62:269–276MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Crowder M (1991) On the identifiability crisis in competing risks analysis. Scand J Stat 18:223–233MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. Dignam JJ, Kocherginsky MN (2008) Choice and interpretation of statistical tests used when competing risks are present. J Clin Oncol 26:4027–4034CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dignam JJ, Zhang Q, Kocherginsky MN (2012) The use and interpretation of competing risks regression models. Clin Cancer Res 18:2301–2308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Feigl P, Zelen M (1965) Estimation of exponential survival probabilities with concomitant information. Biometrics 21:826–838CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fine JP, Gray RJ (1999) A proportional hazards model for the subdistribution of a competing risk. J Am Stat Assoc 94:496–509MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fisher B, Dignam J, Bryant J et al (1996) Five versus more than five years of tamoxifen therapy for breast cancer patients with negative lymph nodes and estrogen-receptor positive tumors. J Natl Cancer Inst 88:1529–1542CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fleming TR, Harrington DP (1991) Counting processes and survival analysis. Wiley, New YorkzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. Freidlin B, Korn EL (2005) Testing treatment effects in the presence of competing risks. Stat Med 24:1703–1712MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gail M (1975) A review and critique of some models used in competing risk analysis. Biometrics 31:209–222MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gaynor JJ, Feuer EJ, Tan CC, Wu DH, Little CR, Straus DJ, Clarkson BD, Brennan MF (1993) On the use of cause-specific failure and conditional failure probabilities: examples from clinical oncology data. J Am Stat Assoc 88:400–409zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gilbert PB, Wei LJ, Kosorok MR, Clemens JD (2002) Simultaneous inferences on the contrast of two hazard functions with censored observations. Biometrics 58:773–780MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gilbert M, Dignam JJ, Armstrong TS et al (2014) A randomized trial of bevacizumab for newly diagnosed glioblastoma. N Engl J Med 370:699–708CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Grambsch P, Therneau T, Fleming TR (1995) Diagnostic plots to reveal functional form for covariates in multiplicative intensity models. Biometrics 51:1469–1482zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gray RJ (1988) A class of K-sample tests for comparing the cumulative incidence of a competing risk. Ann Stat 16:1141–1154MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gray RJ (1994) Spline-based tests in survival analysis. Biometrics 50:640–652MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Karrison TG (1997) Use of Irwin’s restricted mean as an index for comparing survival in different treatment groups – interpretation and power considerations. Contemp Clin Trials 18:151–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Klein JP, Andersen PK (2005) Regression modeling of competing risks data based on pseudovalues of the cumulative incidence function. Biometrics 61:223–229MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Korn EL, Dorey FJ (1992) Applications of crude incidence curves. Stat Med 11:813–829CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lawless JF (2002) Statistical models and methods for lifetime data, 2nd edn. Wiley, New YorkzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Rubinstein LV, Gail MH, Santner TJ (1981) Planning the duration of a comparative clinical trial with loss to follow-up and a period of continued observation. J Chron Dis 34(9–10):469–479Google Scholar
  33. Lawton C, Lin X, Hanks GE et al (2017) Duration of androgen deprivation in locally advanced prostate cancer: long-term update of NRG oncology RTOG 9202. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 98:296–303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Le-Rademacher JG, Peterson RA, Therneau TM, Sanford BL, Stone RM, Mandrekar SJ (2018) Application of multi-state models in cancer clinical trials. Clin Trials 15:489–498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lin DY (1997) Nonparametric inference for cumulative incidence functions in competing risks studies. Stat Med 85:901–910CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Makuch RW (1982) Adjusted survival curve estimation using covariates. J Chronic Dis 35:437–443CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Mantel N (1966) Evaluation of survival data and two rank order statistics in its consideration. Cancer Chemother Rep 50:163–170Google Scholar
  38. Moeschberger ML, Klein JP (1995) Statistical methods for dependent competing risks. Lifetime Data Anal 1:195–204zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Nelson W (1972) Theory and application of hazard plotting for censored failure data. Technometrics 19:945–966CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Pepe MS, Mori M (1993) Kaplan-Meier, marginal, or conditional probability curves in summarizing competing risks failure time data? Stat Med 12:737–751CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Peterson AV (1976) Bounds for a joint distribution function with fixed subdistribution functions: applications to competing risks. Proc Natl Acad Sci 73:11–13zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Peterson B, George SL (1993) Sample size requirements and length of study for testing interaction in a 2 x k factorial design when time-to-failure is the outcome [corrected]. Control Clin Trials 14:511–522. Erratum in: Control Clin Trials 1994 15:326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Polley MY, Freidlin B, Korn EL et al (2013) Statistical and practical considerations for clinical evaluation of predictive markers. J Natl Cancer Inst 105:1677–1683CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Prentice RL, Kalbfleisch JD, Peterson AV, Flournoy N, Farewell VT, Breslow NE (1978) The analysis of failure times in the presence of competing risks. Biometrics 34:541–554zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Royston P, Parmar MK (2002) Flexible parametric proportional-hazards and proportional-odds models for censored survival data, with application to prognostic modeling and estimation of treatment effects. Stat Med 21:2175–2197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Schoenfeld D (1983) Sample-size formula for the proportional hazards regression model. Biometrics 39:499–503zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Therneau TM, Grambsch PM (2000) Modeling survival data: extending the Cox model. Springer, New YorkzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Tsiatis AA (1975) A non-identifiability aspect of the problem of competing risks. Proc Natl Acad Sci 72:20–22MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Tsiatis AA (1981) A large sample study of Cox’s regression model. Ann Stat 9:93–108MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Zhao L, Claggett B, Tian L et al (2016) On the restricted mean survival time curve in survival analysis. Biometrics 72:215–221MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Public Health SciencesThe University of ChicagoChicagoUSA

Section editors and affiliations

  • Stephen George
    • 1
  1. 1.Dept. of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics,Basic Science DivisonDuke University, School of MedicineDurhamUSA

Personalised recommendations