Literature DB >> 24500790

A joint test for progression and survival with interval-censored data from a cancer clinical trial.

Dianne M Finkelstein1, David A Schoenfeld.   

Abstract

Clinical trials often assess efficacy by comparing treatments on the basis of two or more event-time outcomes. In the case of cancer clinical trials, progression-free survival (PFS), which is the minimum of the time from randomization to progression or to death, summarizes the comparison of treatments on the hazards for disease progression and mortality. However, the analysis of PFS does not utilize all the information we have on patients in the trial. First, if both progression and death times are recorded, then information on death time is ignored in the PFS analysis. Second, disease progression is monitored at regular clinic visits, and progression time is recorded as the first visit at which evidence of progression is detected. However, many patients miss or have irregular visits (resulting in interval-censored data) and sometimes die of the cancer before progression was recorded. In this case, the previous progression-free time could provide additional information on the treatment efficacy. The aim of this paper is to propose a method for comparing treatments that could more fully utilize the data on progression and death. We develop a test for treatment effect based on of the joint distribution of progression and survival. The issue of interval censoring is handled using the very simple and intuitive approach of the Conditional Expected Score Test (CEST). We focus on the application of these methods in cancer research.
Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Conditional Expected Score Test (CEST); PRO logistic model; interval-censored failure time data; progression-free survival (PFS)

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24500790      PMCID: PMC4112954          DOI: 10.1002/sim.6096

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


  12 in total

1.  Correcting for noncompliance and dependent censoring in an AIDS Clinical Trial with inverse probability of censoring weighted (IPCW) log-rank tests.

Authors:  J M Robins; D M Finkelstein
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 2.571

2.  Analysis of failure time data with dependent interval censoring.

Authors:  Dianne M Finkelstein; William B Goggins; David A Schoenfeld
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 2.571

3.  Relation of pooled logistic regression to time dependent Cox regression analysis: the Framingham Heart Study.

Authors:  R B D'Agostino; M L Lee; A J Belanger; L A Cupples; K Anderson; W B Kannel
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1990-12       Impact factor: 2.373

4.  A Markov chain Monte Carlo EM algorithm for analyzing interval-censored data under the Cox proportional hazards model.

Authors:  W B Goggins; D M Finkelstein; D A Schoenfeld; A M Zaslavsky
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1998-12       Impact factor: 2.571

5.  A test for the relationship between a time-varying marker and both recovery and progression with missing data.

Authors:  David A Schoenfeld; Natasa Rajicic; Linda H Ficociello; Dianne M Finkelstein
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2011-01-11       Impact factor: 2.373

6.  A proportional hazards model for interval-censored failure time data.

Authors:  D M Finkelstein
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1986-12       Impact factor: 2.571

7.  Randomized trial of letrozole following tamoxifen as extended adjuvant therapy in receptor-positive breast cancer: updated findings from NCIC CTG MA.17.

Authors:  Paul E Goss; James N Ingle; Silvana Martino; Nicholas J Robert; Hyman B Muss; Martine J Piccart; Monica Castiglione; Dongsheng Tu; Lois E Shepherd; Kathleen I Pritchard; Robert B Livingston; Nancy E Davidson; Larry Norton; Edith A Perez; Jeffrey S Abrams; David A Cameron; Michael J Palmer; Joseph L Pater
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2005-09-07       Impact factor: 13.506

8.  A proportional hazards model for multivariate interval-censored failure time data.

Authors:  W B Goggins; D M Finkelstein
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 2.571

9.  A randomized trial of letrozole in postmenopausal women after five years of tamoxifen therapy for early-stage breast cancer.

Authors:  Paul E Goss; James N Ingle; Silvana Martino; Nicholas J Robert; Hyman B Muss; Martine J Piccart; Monica Castiglione; Dongsheng Tu; Lois E Shepherd; Kathleen I Pritchard; Robert B Livingston; Nancy E Davidson; Larry Norton; Edith A Perez; Jeffrey S Abrams; Patrick Therasse; Michael J Palmer; Joseph L Pater
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2003-10-09       Impact factor: 91.245

10.  Analysis of the relationship between longitudinal gene expressions and ordered categorical event data.

Authors:  Natasa Rajicic; Dianne M Finkelstein; David A Schoenfeld
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2009-09-30       Impact factor: 2.373

View more
  2 in total

1.  A rank test for bivariate time-to-event outcomes when one event is a surrogate.

Authors:  Pamela A Shaw; Michael P Fay
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2016-04-05       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  Beyond Composite Endpoints Analysis: Semicompeting Risks as an Underutilized Framework for Cancer Research.

Authors:  Ina Jazić; Deborah Schrag; Daniel J Sargent; Sebastien Haneuse
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2016-07-05       Impact factor: 13.506

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.