Practical recommendations for reporting Fine-Gray model analyses for competing risk data

Peter C Austin, Jason P Fine, Peter C Austin, Jason P Fine

Abstract

In survival analysis, a competing risk is an event whose occurrence precludes the occurrence of the primary event of interest. Outcomes in medical research are frequently subject to competing risks. In survival analysis, there are 2 key questions that can be addressed using competing risk regression models: first, which covariates affect the rate at which events occur, and second, which covariates affect the probability of an event occurring over time. The cause-specific hazard model estimates the effect of covariates on the rate at which events occur in subjects who are currently event-free. Subdistribution hazard ratios obtained from the Fine-Gray model describe the relative effect of covariates on the subdistribution hazard function. Hence, the covariates in this model can also be interpreted as having an effect on the cumulative incidence function or on the probability of events occurring over time. We conducted a review of the use and interpretation of the Fine-Gray subdistribution hazard model in articles published in the medical literature in 2015. We found that many authors provided an unclear or incorrect interpretation of the regression coefficients associated with this model. An incorrect and inconsistent interpretation of regression coefficients may lead to confusion when comparing results across different studies. Furthermore, an incorrect interpretation of estimated regression coefficients can result in an incorrect understanding about the magnitude of the association between exposure and the incidence of the outcome. The objective of this article is to clarify how these regression coefficients should be reported and to propose suggestions for interpreting these coefficients.

Keywords: competing risks; cumulative incidence function; subdistribution hazard model; survival analysis.

© 2017 The Authors. Statistics in Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Comparison of logit and complementary log‐log link functions [Colour figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]

References

    1. Kaplan EL, Meier P. Nonparametric estimation from incomplete observations. J Am Stat Assoc. 1958;53:457‐481.
    1. Cox D. Regression models and life tables (with discussion). J Royal Stat Soc ‐ Series B. 1972;34:187‐220.
    1. Tu JV, Donovan LR, Lee DS, et al. Effectiveness of public report cards for improving the quality of cardiac care: the EFFECT study: a randomized trial. JAMA. 2009;302(21):2330‐2337.
    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.
    1. Lau B, Cole SR, Gange SJ. Competing risk regression models for epidemiologic data. Am J Epidemiol. 2009;170(2):244‐256.
    1. Putter H, Fiocco M, Geskus RB. Tutorial in biostatistics: competing risks and multi‐state models. Stat Med. 2007;26(11):2389‐2430.
    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. 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(6):648‐653.
    1. McCullagh N, Nelder JA. Generalized Linear Models. London: Chapman & Hall; 1989.
    1. Boekel NB, Schaapveld M, Gietema JA, et al. Cardiovascular disease risk in a large, population‐based cohort of breast cancer survivors. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2016;94(5):1061‐1072.
    1. Kim HW, Ryu GW, Park CH, et al. Hyponatremia predicts new‐onset cardiovascular events in peritoneal dialysis patients. PLoS One. 2015;10(6): e0129480. DOI:
    1. Han K, Pintilie M, Lipscombe LL, Lega IC, Milosevic MF, Fyles AW. Association between metformin use and mortality after cervical cancer in older women with diabetes. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2016;25(3):507‐512.
    1. Bai AD, Showler A, Burry L, et al. Impact of infectious disease consultation on quality of care, mortality, and length of stay in Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia: results from a large multicenter cohort study. Clin Infect Dis. 2015;60(10):1451‐1461.
    1. Feinstein L, Edmonds A, Okitolonda V, et al. Implementation and operational research: maternal combination antiretroviral therapy is associated with improved retention of HIV‐exposed infants in Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of Congo. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2015;69(3):e93‐e99.
    1. Wolbers M, Koller MT, Stel VS, et al. Competing risks analyses: objectives and approaches. Eur Heart J. 2014;35(42):2936‐2941.
    1. Austin PC, Lee DS, D'Agostino RB, Fine JP. Developing points‐based risk‐scoring systems in the presence of competing risks. Stat Med. 2016;35(22):4056‐4072.
    1. Wolbers M, Koller MT, Witteman JC, Steyerberg EW. Prognostic models with competing risks: methods and application to coronary risk prediction. Epidemiology. 2009;20(4):555‐561.
    1. Austin PC, Fine JP. Accounting for competing risks in randomized controlled trials: a review and recommendations for improvement. Stat Med. 2017;36(8):1203‐1209.

Source: PubMed

Sponsorzy i współpracownicy

Warunki medyczne

Interwencje lekowe

3
Subskrybuj