Literature DB >> 26988930

Correcting for dependent censoring in routine outcome monitoring data by applying the inverse probability censoring weighted estimator.

Sjw Willems1, A Schat2, M S van Noorden2, M Fiocco1,3.   

Abstract

Censored data make survival analysis more complicated because exact event times are not observed. Statistical methodology developed to account for censored observations assumes that patients' withdrawal from a study is independent of the event of interest. However, in practice, some covariates might be associated to both lifetime and censoring mechanism, inducing dependent censoring. In this case, standard survival techniques, like Kaplan-Meier estimator, give biased results. The inverse probability censoring weighted estimator was developed to correct for bias due to dependent censoring. In this article, we explore the use of inverse probability censoring weighting methodology and describe why it is effective in removing the bias. Since implementing this method is highly time consuming and requires programming and mathematical skills, we propose a user friendly algorithm in R. Applications to a toy example and to a medical data set illustrate how the algorithm works. A simulation study was carried out to investigate the performance of the inverse probability censoring weighted estimators in situations where dependent censoring is present in the data. In the simulation process, different sample sizes, strengths of the censoring model, and percentages of censored individuals were chosen. Results show that in each scenario inverse probability censoring weighting reduces the bias induced in the traditional Kaplan-Meier approach where dependent censoring is ignored.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Survival analysis; dependent censoring; informative censoring; inverse probability censoring weighted estimator; inverse probability weighting

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26988930     DOI: 10.1177/0962280216628900

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res        ISSN: 0962-2802            Impact factor:   3.021


  8 in total

1.  Accuracy of Electronic Medical Record Follow-Up Data for Estimating the Survival Time of Patients With Cancer.

Authors:  Michael F Gensheimer; Balasubramanian Narasimhan; A Solomon Henry; Douglas J Wood; Daniel L Rubin
Journal:  JCO Clin Cancer Inform       Date:  2022-06

2.  Lung Function Trajectories Leading to Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease as Predictors of Exacerbations and Mortality.

Authors:  Jacob Louis Marott; Truls Sylvan Ingebrigtsen; Yunus Çolak; Jørgen Vestbo; Peter Lange
Journal:  Am J Respir Crit Care Med       Date:  2020-07-15       Impact factor: 21.405

3.  Y90 Radioembolization Significantly Prolongs Time to Progression Compared With Chemoembolization in Patients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Authors:  Riad Salem; Andrew C Gordon; Samdeep Mouli; Ryan Hickey; Joseph Kallini; Ahmed Gabr; Mary F Mulcahy; Talia Baker; Michael Abecassis; Frank H Miller; Vahid Yaghmai; Kent Sato; Kush Desai; Bartley Thornburg; Al B Benson; Alfred Rademaker; Daniel Ganger; Laura Kulik; Robert J Lewandowski
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2016-08-27       Impact factor: 22.682

4.  Smoking status and cause-specific discontinuation of tumour necrosis factor inhibitors in axial spondyloarthritis.

Authors:  Sizheng Steven Zhao; Kazuki Yoshida; Gareth T Jones; David M Hughes; Stephen J Duffield; Sara K Tedeschi; Houchen Lyu; Robert J Moots; Daniel H Solomon; Nicola J Goodson
Journal:  Arthritis Res Ther       Date:  2019-07-22       Impact factor: 5.156

5.  Marginal structural models with dose-delay joint-exposure for assessing variations to chemotherapy intensity.

Authors:  Carlo Lancia; Cristian Spitoni; Jakob Anninga; Jeremy Whelan; Matthew R Sydes; Gordana Jovic; Marta Fiocco
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2018-06-19       Impact factor: 3.021

6.  Reflection on modern methods: trial emulation in the presence of immortal-time bias. Assessing the benefit of major surgery for elderly lung cancer patients using observational data.

Authors:  Camille Maringe; Sara Benitez Majano; Aimilia Exarchakou; Matthew Smith; Bernard Rachet; Aurélien Belot; Clémence Leyrat
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2020-10-01       Impact factor: 7.196

Review 7.  Considerations of Competing Risks Analysis in Cardio-Oncology Studies: JACC: CardioOncology State-of-the-Art Review.

Authors:  Yimei Li; Lova Sun; Danielle S Burstein; Kelly D Getz
Journal:  JACC CardioOncol       Date:  2022-09-20

8.  Mitochondrial DNA copy number and incident atrial fibrillation.

Authors:  Di Zhao; Traci M Bartz; Nona Sotoodehnia; Wendy S Post; Susan R Heckbert; Alvaro Alonso; Ryan J Longchamps; Christina A Castellani; Yun Soo Hong; Jerome I Rotter; Henry J Lin; Brian O'Rourke; Nathan Pankratz; John A Lane; Stephanie Y Yang; Eliseo Guallar; Dan E Arking
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2020-09-16       Impact factor: 11.150

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.