220 likes | 352 Views
Modelling time dependent hazard ratios in relative survival: application to colon cancer. BOLARD P, QUANTIN C, ABRAHAMOWICZ M, ESTEVE J, GIORGI R, CHADHA-BOREHAM H, BINQUET C, FAIVRE J. INTRODUCTION. Previous results of the Flexible generalisation of the Cox model.
E N D
Modelling time dependent hazard ratios in relative survival: application to colon cancer. BOLARD P, QUANTIN C, ABRAHAMOWICZ M, ESTEVE J, GIORGI R, CHADHA-BOREHAM H, BINQUET C, FAIVRE J.
INTRODUCTION Previous results of the Flexible generalisation of the Cox model • - The PH hypothesis does not hold for most prognostic factors for all-causes mortality in colon cancer • Some of these effects may reflect the inability of the method to separate cancer-related mortality from all-causes mortality • - Analyses of our BRDC colon cancer data require simultaneous modelling of both relative survival and possibly non-proportional hazards.
METHODS PH Relative survival model of Esteve et al. Non PH Relative survival models piecewise PH model parametric time-by-covariate interaction non-parametric time-by-covariate (spline)
PIECEWISE PH MODEL For the k-th time-segment, k = 1 … r Test of the PH: j2 = j3 = …… jr = 0
PARAMETRIC TIME-BY-COVARIATE INTERACTION For the k-th time-segment
CUBIC SPLINE FUNCTIONS FOR MODELLING TIME-BY-COVARIATE INTERACTIONS
RESTRICTED CUBIC SPLINE FUNCTIONS FOR MODELLING TIME-BY-COVARIATE INTERACTION
TESTS Any type of dependence with time j1 = j2 = 0 Non linear dependence j2 = 0 Effect of covariate Zj j0 = j1 = j2 = 0
NUMBER OF KNOTS AND THEIR LOCATION Number: can be restricted between 3 and 5 knots in most cases [Stone ] 3 knots. Location: * both - quantiles of the distribution function of deaths. - percentiles of the distribution function of the follow-up times. * In our restricted cubic spline model, we cannot fix the knots too near the extremes because of the linearity constraints. 5th,50th and 95th quantiles
APPLICATION: PATIENTS 2075 cases of colon cancer diagnosed between 76 and 90 (Burgundy Registry of Digestive Cancers) end of follow-up: December 31, 1994. 1334 deaths at 5 years Median survival time of 12 months
Prognostic factors: * gender * age (< 65, 65-74, 75) * periods of diagnosis (76-78, 79-81, 82-84, 85-87, 88-90) * cancer TNM stage
Comparison of crude (Cox model) and relative survival (Esteve model) Proportional Hazard model in multivariate analyses Click for larger picture
Testing the Proportional Hazard assumption in multivariate Relative Survival analysis Click for larger picture
Change of the Hazard Ratio associated to age (reference category: < 65 years) using piecewise Proportional Hazard models in crude and relative survival Click for larger picture
Test of proportional hazard assumption obtained with model 3 using restricted cubic spline functions for modelling different time-by-covariate interactions. Click for larger picture
1,50 0,00 -1,50
CONCLUSION Both flexible modelling of non-proportional hazards and the relative survival approach are important: differences between relative survival and the conventional Cox model. Restricted cubic spline model * better fit than a linear time-by-covariate interaction * more parsimonious than a piecewise PH relative survival model * allows to represent both simple and complex patterns of changes Number and the location of knots