Literature DB >> 20213719

Estimating the crude probability of death due to cancer and other causes using relative survival models.

P C Lambert1, P W Dickman, C P Nelson, P Royston.   

Abstract

Relative survival is used extensively in population-based cancer studies to measure patient survival correcting for causes of death not related to the disease of interest. An advantage of relative survival is that it provides a measure of mortality associated with a particular disease, without the need for information on cause of death. Relative survival provides a measure of net mortality, i.e. the probability of death due to cancer in the absence of other causes. This is a useful measure, but it is also of interest to measure crude mortality, i.e. the probability of death due to cancer in the presence of other causes. A previous approach to estimate the crude probability of death in population-based cancer studies used life table methods, but we show how the estimates can be obtained after fitting a relative survival model. We adopt flexible parametric models for relative survival, which use restricted cubic splines for the baseline cumulative excess hazard and for any time-dependent effects. We illustrate the approach using an example of men diagnosed with prostate cancer in England and Wales showing the differences in net and crude survival for different ages.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20213719     DOI: 10.1002/sim.3762

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stat Med        ISSN: 0277-6715            Impact factor:   2.373


  29 in total

1.  Tolerability of Cholinesterase Inhibitors: A Population-Based Study of Persistence, Adherence, and Switching.

Authors:  Anat Fisher; Greg Carney; Ken Bassett; Colin R Dormuth
Journal:  Drugs Aging       Date:  2017-03       Impact factor: 3.923

2.  The impact of state-specific life tables on relative survival.

Authors:  Antoinette M Stroup; Hyunsoon Cho; Steve M Scoppa; Hannah K Weir; Angela B Mariotto
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr       Date:  2014-11

3.  A competing risk analysis of death patterns in male genitourinary cancer.

Authors:  Atanu Bhattacharjee; Gaurav Roy; Atul Budukh; Rajesh Dikshit; Vijay M Patil; Amit Joshi; Vanita Noronha; Kumar Prabash; Papai Roy
Journal:  Cancer Rep (Hoboken)       Date:  2019-04-04

4.  Why we should take care of the competing risk bias in survival analysis: A phase II trial on the toxicity profile of radiotherapy for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Annarita Tullio; Alessandro Magli; Eugenia Moretti; Francesca Valent
Journal:  Rep Pract Oncol Radiother       Date:  2019-08-19

5.  Causes of death in people with liver cirrhosis in England compared with the general population: a population-based cohort study.

Authors:  Sonia Ratib; Kate M Fleming; Colin J Crooks; Alex J Walker; Joe West
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2015-07-14       Impact factor: 10.864

6.  Crude probability of death for cancer patients by spread of disease in New South Wales, Australia 1985 to 2014.

Authors:  Xue Qin Yu; Paramita Dasgupta; Clare Kahn; Kou Kou; Susanna Cramb; Peter Baade
Journal:  Cancer Med       Date:  2021-05-06       Impact factor: 4.452

7.  Avoidable deaths and random variation in patients' survival.

Authors:  K Seppä; T Hakulinen; E Läärä
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2012-04-24       Impact factor: 7.640

8.  Use of relative survival to evaluate non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction quality of care and clinical outcomes.

Authors:  Marlous Hall; Oras A Alabas; Tatendashe B Dondo; Tomas Jernberg; Chris P Gale
Journal:  Eur Heart J Qual Care Clin Outcomes       Date:  2015-11-01

9.  Direct modeling of the crude probability of cancer death and the number of life years lost due to cancer without the need of cause of death: a pseudo-observation approach in the relative survival setting.

Authors:  Dimitra-Kleio Kipourou; Maja Pohar Perme; Bernard Rachet; Aurelien Belot
Journal:  Biostatistics       Date:  2022-01-13       Impact factor: 5.899

10.  Flexible parametric modelling of cause-specific hazards to estimate cumulative incidence functions.

Authors:  Sally R Hinchliffe; Paul C Lambert
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2013-02-06       Impact factor: 4.615

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.