×

Comparison of joint modeling and landmarking for dynamic prediction under an illness-death model. (English) Zbl 1379.62086

Summary: Dynamic prediction incorporates time-dependent marker information accrued during follow-up to improve personalized survival prediction probabilities. At any follow-up, or “landmark”, time, the residual time distribution for an individual, conditional on their updated marker values, can be used to produce a dynamic prediction. To satisfy a consistency condition that links dynamic predictions at different time points, the residual time distribution must follow from a prediction function that models the joint distribution of the marker process and time to failure, such as a joint model. To circumvent the assumptions and computational burden associated with a joint model, approximate methods for dynamic prediction have been proposed. One such method is landmarking, which fits a Cox model at a sequence of landmark times, and thus is not a comprehensive probability model of the marker process and the event time. Considering an illness-death model, we derive the residual time distribution and demonstrate that the structure of the Cox model baseline hazard and covariate effects under the landmarking approach do not have simple form. We suggest some extensions of the landmark Cox model that should provide a better approximation. We compare the performance of the landmark models with joint models using simulation studies and cognitive aging data from the PAQUID study. We examine the predicted probabilities produced under both methods using data from a prostate cancer study, where metastatic clinical failure is a time-dependent covariate for predicting death following radiation therapy.

MSC:

62P10 Applications of statistics to biology and medical sciences; meta analysis
62N05 Reliability and life testing

References:

[1] Anderson, J. R., Cain, K. C., and Gelber, R. D. (1983). Analysis of survival by tumor response. Journal of Clinical Oncology1, 710-719.
[2] Blanche, P., Proust‐Lima, C., Loubère, L., Berr, C., Dartigues, J. F., and Jacqmin‐Gadda, H. (2015). Quantifying and comparing dynamic predictive accuracy of joint models for longitudinal marker and time‐to‐event in presence of censoring and competing risks. Biometrics71, 102-113. · Zbl 1419.62313
[3] Bycott, P. W. and Taylor, J. M. G., (1998). A comparison of smoothing techniques for CD4 data measured with error in a time‐dependent Cox proportional hazards model. Statistics in Medicine17, 2061-2077.
[4] Commenges, D. (2002). Inference for multi‐state models from interval‐censored data. Statistical Methods in Medical Research11, 167-182. · Zbl 1121.62589
[5] Cortese, G., Gerds, T. A., and Andersen, P. K. (2013). Comparing predictions among competing risks models with time‐dependent covariates. Statistics in Medicine32, 3089-3101.
[6] Dartigues, J.‐F., Gagnon, M., Barberger‐Gateau, P., Letenneur, L., Commenges, D., Sauvel, C., Michel, P., and Salamon, R. (1992). The PAQUID epidemiological program on brain ageing. Neuroepidemiology11, 14-18.
[7] de Wreede, L. C., Fiocco, M., and Putter, H. (2011). mstate: an R package for the analysis of competing risks and multi‐state models. Journal of Statistical Software38, 1-30.
[8] Foucher, Y., Giral, M., Soulillou, J. P., and Daures, J. P. (2010). A flexible semi‐Markov model for interval‐censored data and goodness‐of‐fit testing. Statistical Methods in Medical Research19, 127-145.
[9] Henderson, R., Diggle, P., and Dobson, A. (2000). Joint modelling of longitudinal measurements and event time data. Biostatistics1, 465-480. · Zbl 1089.62519
[10] Jewell, N. P. and Kalbfleisch, J. (1996). Marker processes in survival analysis. Lifetime Data Analysis2, 15-29. · Zbl 0866.62070
[11] Jewell, N. P. and Kalbfleisch, J. D. (1992). Marker models in survival analysis and applications to issues associated with aids, in AIDS Epidemiology, Birkhäuser Boston, Boston, MA, pp. 211-230.
[12] Jewell, N. P. and Nielsen, J. P. (1993). A framework for consistent prediction rules based on markers. Biometrika80, 153-164. · Zbl 0772.62052
[13] Kalbfleisch, J. D. and Prentice, R. L. (2011). The Statistical Analysis of Failure Time Data (2nd edn.). J. Wiley, Hoboken, NJ.
[14] Maziarz, M., Heagerty, P., Cai, T., and Zheng, Y. (2016). On longitudinal prediction with time‐to‐event outcome: comparison of modeling options. Biometrics73, 83-93. · Zbl 1366.62233
[15] Putter, H. (2015). dynpred: companion package to “Dynamic prediction in clinical survival analysis.”R package version 0.1.2. https://CRAN.R‐project.org/package=dynpred.
[16] Putter, H. and vanHouwelingen, H. C. (2016). Understanding landmarking and its relation with time‐dependent Cox regression. Statistics in Biosciences.
[17] Rizopoulos, D. (2011). Dynamic predictions and prospective accuracy in joint models for longitudinal and time‐to‐event data. Biometrics67, 819-829. · Zbl 1226.62124
[18] Rizopoulos, D., Murawska, M., Andrinopoulou, E‐R., Molenberghs, G., Takkenberg, J. J., and Lesaffre, E. (2013). Dynamic predictions with time‐dependent covariates in survival analysis using joint modeling and landmarking. Unpublished manuscript.
[19] Shi, M., Taylor, J. M. G., and MuñozA., (1996). Models for residual time to aids. Lifetime Data Analysis2, 31-49. · Zbl 0866.62075
[20] Touraine, C., Joly, P., and Gerds, T. A. (2014). SmoothHazard: fitting illness‐death model for interval‐censored data. R package version 1.2.3. https://CRAN.R‐project.org/package=SmoothHazard.
[21] Taylor, J. M. G., Yu, M., and Sandler, H. (2005). Individualized Predictions of Disease Progression Following Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer. Journal of Clinical Oncology23, 816-825.
[22] Taylor, J. M. G., Park, Y., Ankerst, D. P., Proust‐Lima, C., Williams, S., Kestin, L., Bae, K., Pickles, T., and Sandler, H. (2013). Real‐time individual predictions of prostate cancer recurrence using joint models. Biometrics69, 206-213. · Zbl 1272.62093
[23] vanHouwelingen, H. C. and Putter, H. (2011). Dynamic prediction in clinical survival analysis. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
[24] vanHouwelingen, H. C. (2007). Dynamic prediction by landmarking in event history analysis. Scandinavian Journal of Statistics34, 70-85. · Zbl 1142.62083
[25] Zheng, Y. and Heagerty, P. J. (2005). Partly conditional survival models for longitudinal data. Biometrics61, 379-391. · Zbl 1077.62090
This reference list is based on information provided by the publisher or from digital mathematics libraries. Its items are heuristically matched to zbMATH identifiers and may contain data conversion errors. In some cases that data have been complemented/enhanced by data from zbMATH Open. This attempts to reflect the references listed in the original paper as accurately as possible without claiming completeness or a perfect matching.