Nonparametric Assessment of Differences Between Competing Risk Hazard Ratios: Application to Racial Differences in Pediatric Chronic Kidney Disease Progression

Derek K Ng, Daniel A Antiporta, Matthew B Matheson, Alvaro Muñoz, Derek K Ng, Daniel A Antiporta, Matthew B Matheson, Alvaro Muñoz

Abstract

Associations between an exposure and multiple competing events are typically described by cause-specific hazard ratios (csHR) or subdistribution hazard ratios (sHR). However, diagnostic tools to assess differences between them have not been described. Under the proportionality assumption for both, it can be shown mathematically that the sHR and csHR must be equal, so reporting different time-constant sHR and csHR implies non-proportionality for at least one. We propose a simple, intuitive approach using the ratio of sHR/csHR to nonparametrically compare these metrics. In general, for the non-null case, there must be at least one event type for which the sHR and csHR differ, and the proposed diagnostic will be useful to identify these cases. Furthermore, once standard methods are used to estimate the csHR, multiplying it with our nonparametric estimate for the sHR/csHR ratio will yield estimates of sHR which fulfill intrinsic linkages of the subhazards that separate analysis may violate. In addition, for non-null cases, at least one must be time dependent (i.e., non-proportional), and thus our tool serves as an indirect test of the proportionality assumption. We applied this proposed diagnostic tool to data from a cohort of children with congenital kidney disease to describe racial differences in the time to first dialysis or first transplant and extend methods to include adjustment for socioeconomic factors.

Keywords: cause-specific hazard ratios; chronic kidney disease; competing risk analysis; nonparametric methods; sub-distribution hazard ratios; survival analysis.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work.

© 2020 Ng et al.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Extended nonparametric (solid) cumulative incidence functions of composite RRT (A) and first occurrence of dialysis (grey) or transplant (black) as competing events (B), by African-American (bold), and non-African-American (unbolded) participants with a pediatric diagnosis of kidney disease.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Results from cause-specific hazard (i.e., Cox regression) and subhazard (i.e., Fine and Gray regression) models with first dialysis (A) and first transplant (B) as competing events presenting the time-varying hazard ratios comparing African-American to non-African-American participants with a pediatric onset of kidney disease.
Figure 3
Figure 3
(A and B) Ratios of subhazard ratio to cause-specific hazard ratio for dialysis and transplant, respectively. (C and D) Subhazard ratios via nonparametric and classical semiparametric cause-specific hazard ratios for dialysis and transplant, respectively. For (A and B), solid lines depict the nonparametric estimator with bootstrapped 95% confidence intervals and dashed lines depict the semiparametric estimator based on the models presented in Figure 2.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Adjusted nonparametric competing risk analyses based on inverse probability weights controlling for socioeconomic status variables associated with race. (A) presents the extended nonparametric (solid) cumulative incidence functions of first occurrence of dialysis (grey) or transplant (black) as competing events by race. Adjusted nonparametric ratios of subhazard ratio to cause-specific hazard ratio for dialysis (grey, B) and transplant (black, C) with adjusted bootstrapped 95% confidence intervals.

References

    1. Prentice RL, Kalbfleisch JD, Peterson AV, Flournoy N, Farewell VT, Breslow NE. The analysis of failure times in the presence of competing risks. Biometrics. 1978;34:541–554. doi:10.2307/2530374
    1. Crowder MJ. Classical Competing Risks. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press; 2001.
    1. Pintilie M. Competing Risks: A Practical Perspective. Chichester, England: John Wiley & Sons; 2006.
    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. 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. Andersen PK, Geskus RB, de Witte T, Putter H. Competing risks in epidemiology: possibilities and pitfalls. Int J Epidemiol. 2012;41:861–870. doi:10.1093/ije/dyr213
    1. Kuk D, Varadhan R. Model selection in competing risks regression. Stat Med. 2013;32:3077–3088. doi:10.1002/sim.5762
    1. Taghipour S, Banjevic D, Miller A, Harvey B. Competing risks models and breast cancer: a brief review In: M-LT L, Gail M, Pfeiffer R, Satten G, Cai T, Gandy A, editors. Risk Assessment and Evaluation of Predictions. New York: Springer; 2013:301–313.
    1. Austin PC, Lee DS, Fine JP. Introduction to the analysis of survival data in the presence of competing risks. Circulation. 2016;133:601–609. doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.115.017719
    1. Gaynor JJ, Feuer EJ, Tan CC, et al. On the use of cause-specific failure and conditional failure probabilities: examples from clinical oncology data. J Am Stat Assoc. 1993;88:400–409. doi:10.2307/2290318
    1. Fine JP, Gray RJ. A proportional hazards model for the subdistribution of a competing risk. J Am Stat Assoc. 1999;94:496. doi:10.2307/2670170
    1. Andersen PK, Keiding N. Interpretability and importance of functionals in competing risks and multistate models. Stat Med. 2012;31:1074–1088. doi:10.1002/sim.4385
    1. Lau B, Cole SR, Gange SJ. Parametric mixture models to evaluate and summarize hazard ratios in the presence of competing risks with time-dependent hazards and delayed entry. Stat Med. 2011;30:654–665. doi:10.1002/sim.4123
    1. Ren X, Li S, Shen C, Yu Z. Linear and nonlinear variable selection in competing risks data. Stat Med. 2018;37:2134–2147. doi:10.1002/sim.7637
    1. Troendle JF, Leifer ES, Kunz L. Dealing with competing risks in clinical trials: how to choose the primary efficacy analysis? Stat Med. 2018;37:2787–2796. doi:10.1002/sim.7800
    1. Wolbers M, Koller MT, Witteman JCM, 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. 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. Wolbers M, Koller MT, Stel VS, et al. Competing risks analyses: objectives and approaches. Eur Heart J. 2014;35:2936–2941. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehu131
    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. Poythress JC, Lee MY, Young J. Planning and analyzing clinical trials with competing risks: recommendations for choosing appropriate statistical methodology. Pharm Stat. 2019. doi:10.1002/pst.1966
    1. Wolkewitz M, Palomar-Martinez M, Olaechea-Astigarraga P, Alvarez-Lerma F, Schumacher M. A full competing risk analysis of hospital-acquired infections can easily be performed by a case-cohort approach. J Clin Epidemiol. 2016;74:187–193. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.11.011
    1. Hsu JY, Roy JA, Xie D, et al. Statistical methods for cohort studies of CKD: survival analysis in the setting of competing risks. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2017;12:1181–1189. doi:10.2215/CJN.10301016.
    1. Beyersmann J, Latouche A, Buchholz A, Schumacher M. Simulating competing risks data in survival analysis. Stat Med. 2009;28:956–971. doi:10.1002/sim.3516
    1. Muñoz A, Abraham AG, Matheson M, Wada N. Non-proportionality of hazards in the competing risks framework In: M-LT L, Gail M, Pfeiffer R, Satten G, Cai T, Gandy A, editors. Risk Assessment and Evaluation of Predictions. New York: Springer; 2013:3–22.
    1. Checkley W, Brower RG, Muñoz A. Inference for mutually exclusive competing events through a mixture of generalized gamma distributions. Epidemiology. 2010;21:557–565. doi:10.1097/EDE.0b013e3181e090ed.
    1. Scrutinio D, Guida P, Passantino A, et al. Application of competing risks analysis improved prognostic assessment of patients with decompensated chronic heart failure and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction. J Clin Epidemiol. 2018;103:31–39. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.07.006
    1. Austin PC, Fine JP. Accounting for competing risks in randomized controlled trials: a review and recommendations for improvement. Stat Med. 2017;36:1203–1209. doi:10.1002/sim.7215
    1. Ng DK, Moxey-Mims M, Warady BA, Furth SL, Muñoz A. Racial differences in renal replacement therapy initiation among children with a nonglomerular cause of chronic kidney disease. Ann Epidemiol. 2016;26:780–787.e1. doi:10.1016/j.annepidem.2016.09.011
    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. doi:10.1002/(ISSN)1097-0258
    1. Furth SL, Cole SR, Moxey-Mims M, et al. Design and methods of the Chronic Kidney Disease in Children (CKiD) prospective cohort study. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2006;1:1006–1015. doi:10.2215/CJN.01941205
    1. Wong CS, Pierce CB, Cole SR, et al. Association of proteinuria with race, cause of chronic kidney disease, and glomerular filtration rate in the chronic kidney disease in children study. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2009;4:812–819. doi:10.2215/CJN.01780408
    1. Pierce CB, Cox C, Saland JM, Furth SL, Muñoz A. Methods for characterizing differences in longitudinal glomerular filtration rate changes between children with glomerular chronic kidney disease and those with nonglomerular chronic kidney disease. Am J Epidemiol. 2011;174:604–612. doi:10.1093/aje/kwr121
    1. Babiker A, Darbyshire J, Pezzotti P, et al. Changes over calendar time in the risk of specific first AIDS-defining events following HIV seroconversion, adjusting for competing risks. Int J Epidemiol. 2002;31:951–958.
    1. Lim HJ, Zhang X, Dyck R, Osgood N. Methods of competing risks analysis of end-stage renal disease and mortality among people with diabetes. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2010;10:97. doi:10.1186/1471-2288-10-97
    1. Noordzij M, Leffondré K, van Stralen KJ, Zoccali C, Dekker FW, Jager KJ. When do we need competing risks methods for survival analysis in nephrology? Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2013;28:2670–2677. doi:10.1093/ndt/gft355
    1. Latouche A, Boisson V, Chevret S, Porcher R. Misspecified regression model for the subdistribution hazard of a competing risk. Stat Med. 2007;26:965–974. doi:10.1002/sim.2600

Source: PubMed

3
Suscribir