Introduction to the Analysis of Survival Data in the Presence of Competing Risks

Peter C Austin, Douglas S Lee, Jason P Fine, Peter C Austin, Douglas S Lee, Jason P Fine

Abstract

Competing risks occur frequently in the analysis of survival data. A competing risk is an event whose occurrence precludes the occurrence of the primary event of interest. In a study examining time to death attributable to cardiovascular causes, death attributable to noncardiovascular causes is a competing risk. When estimating the crude incidence of outcomes, analysts should use the cumulative incidence function, rather than the complement of the Kaplan-Meier survival function. The use of the Kaplan-Meier survival function results in estimates of incidence that are biased upward, regardless of whether the competing events are independent of one another. When fitting regression models in the presence of competing risks, researchers can choose from 2 different families of models: modeling the effect of covariates on the cause-specific hazard of the outcome or modeling the effect of covariates on the cumulative incidence function. The former allows one to estimate the effect of the covariates on the rate of occurrence of the outcome in those subjects who are currently event free. The latter allows one to estimate the effect of covariates on the absolute risk of the outcome over time. The former family of models may be better suited for addressing etiologic questions, whereas the latter model may be better suited for estimating a patient's clinical prognosis. We illustrate the application of these methods by examining cause-specific mortality in patients hospitalized with heart failure. Statistical software code in both R and SAS is provided.

Keywords: cumulative incidence function; data interpretation, statistical; incidence; models, statistical; proportional hazards models; risk assessment; survival analysis.

© 2016 The Authors.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Cumulative incidence functions. CIF indicates cumulative incidence function; and KM, Kaplan–Meier.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Cumulative incidence functions and Kaplan–Meier estimates. CIF indicates cumulative incidence function; and KM, Kaplan–Meier.

References

    1. Kalbfleisch JD, Prentice RL. The Statistical Analysis of Failure Time Data. 2nd ed. New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons; 2002.
    1. Cox D. Regression models and life tables (with discussion). J Roy Stat Soc - Series B. 1972;34:187–220.
    1. Cox D, Oakes D. Analysis of Survival Data. London, UK: Chapman & Hall; 1984.
    1. Therneau TM, Grambsch PM. Modeling Survival Data: Extending the Cox Model. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag; 2000.
    1. Klein JP, Moeschberger ML. Survival Analysis: Techniques for Censored and Truncated Data. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag; 1997.
    1. Lawless JF. Statistical Models and Methods for Lifetime Data. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons; 1982.
    1. Rao SR, Schoenfeld DA. Survival methods. Circulation. 2007;115:109–113. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.106.614859.
    1. Berry SD, Ngo L, Samelson EJ, Kiel DP. Competing risk of death: an important consideration in studies of older adults. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2010;58:783–787. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2010.02767.x.
    1. Lau B, Cole SR, Gange SJ. Competing risk regression models for epidemiologic data. Am J Epidemiol. 2009;170:244–256. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwp107.
    1. Putter H, Fiocco M, Geskus RB. Tutorial in biostatistics: competing risks and multi-state models. Stat Med. 2007;26:2389–2430. doi: 10.1002/sim.2712.
    1. Satagopan JM, Ben-Porat L, Berwick M, Robson M, Kutler D, Auerbach AD. A note on competing risks in survival data analysis. Br J Cancer. 2004;91:1229–1235. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6602102.
    1. Varadhan R, Weiss CO, Segal JB, Wu AW, Scharfstein D, Boyd C. Evaluating health outcomes in the presence of competing risks: a review of statistical methods and clinical applications. Med Care. 2010;48(6 suppl):S96–S105. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e3181d99107.
    1. Pepe MS, Mori M. Kaplan-Meier, marginal or conditional probability curves in summarizing competing risks failure time data? Stat Med. 1993;12:737–751.
    1. Fine JP, Gray RJ. A proportional hazards model for the subdistribution of a competing risk. J Am Stat Assoc. 1999;94:496–509.
    1. Koller MT, Raatz H, Steyerberg EW, Wolbers M. Competing risks and the clinical community: irrelevance or ignorance? Stat Med. 2012;31:1089–1097. doi: 10.1002/sim.4384.
    1. Tu JV, Donovan LR, Lee DS, Wang JT, Austin PC, Alter DA, Ko DT. Effectiveness of public report cards for improving the quality of cardiac care: the EFFECT study: a randomized trial. JAMA. 2009;302:2330–2337. doi: 10.1001/jama.2009.1731.
    1. Latouche A, Allignol A, Beyersmann J, Labopin M, Fine JP. A competing risks analysis should report results on all cause-specific hazards and cumulative incidence functions. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013;66:648–653. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2012.09.017.
    1. Pintilie M. Competing Risks: A Practical Perspective. West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons Ltd; 2006.
    1. Szychowski JM, Roth DL, Clay OJ, Mittelman MS. Patient death as a censoring event or competing risk event in models of nursing home placement. Stat Med. 2010;29:371–381. doi: 10.1002/sim.3797.
    1. Wolbers M, Koller MT, Witteman JC, Steyerberg EW. Prognostic models with competing risks: methods and application to coronary risk prediction. Epidemiology. 2009;20:555–561. doi: 10.1097/EDE.0b013e3181a39056.
    1. Wolbers M, Koller MT, Stel VS, Schaer B, Jager KJ, Leffondré K, Heinze G. Competing risks analyses: objectives and approaches. Eur Heart J. 2014;35:2936–2941. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehu131.

Source: PubMed

Sponzoři a spolupracovníci

Zdravotní podmínky

Drogové intervence

3
Předplatit