Literature DB >> 24038032

Number needed to treat for time-to-event data with competing risks.

Natalia A Gouskova1, Suprateek Kundu, Peter B Imrey, Jason P Fine.   

Abstract

The number needed to treat is a tool often used in clinical settings to illustrate the effect of a treatment. It has been widely adopted in the communication of risks to both clinicians and non-clinicians, such as patients, who are better able to understand this measure than absolute risk or rate reductions. The concept was introduced by Laupacis, Sackett, and Roberts in 1988 for binary data, and extended to time-to-event data by Altman and Andersen in 1999. However, up to the present, there is no definition of the number needed to treat for time-to-event data with competing risks. This paper introduces such a definition using the cumulative incidence function and suggests non-parametric and semi-parametric inferential methods for right-censored time-to-event data in the presence of competing risks. The procedures are illustrated using the data from a breast cancer clinical trial.
Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  competing risks; number needed to treat; time-to-event data

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24038032     DOI: 10.1002/sim.5922

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


  5 in total

Review 1.  Accounting for competing risks in randomized controlled trials: a review and recommendations for improvement.

Authors:  Peter C Austin; Jason P Fine
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2017-01-19       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  Computing and interpreting the Number Needed to Treat for Cardiovascular Outcomes Trials : Perspective on GLP-1 RA and SGLT-2i therapies.

Authors:  Lisa Ludwig; Patrice Darmon; Bruno Guerci
Journal:  Cardiovasc Diabetol       Date:  2020-05-13       Impact factor: 9.951

3.  Validation of the Khorana score for predicting venous thromboembolism in 40 218 patients with cancer initiating chemotherapy.

Authors:  Thure Filskov Overvad; Anne Gulbech Ording; Peter Brønnum Nielsen; Flemming Skjøth; Ida Ehlers Albertsen; Simon Noble; Anders Krog Vistisen; Inger Lise Gade; Marianne Tang Severinsen; Gregory Piazza; Torben Bjerregaard Larsen
Journal:  Blood Adv       Date:  2022-05-24

4.  Competing risks and cancer-specific mortality: why it matters.

Authors:  Kay See Tan; Takashi Eguchi; Prasad S Adusumilli
Journal:  Oncotarget       Date:  2017-12-28

5.  Propensity-score matching with competing risks in survival analysis.

Authors:  Peter C Austin; Jason P Fine
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2018-10-22       Impact factor: 2.373

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.