| Literature DB >> 27660647 |
Mozhgan Safe1, Javad Faradmal2, Hossein Mahjub3.
Abstract
Background. Breast cancer which is the most common cause of women cancer death has an increasing incidence and mortality rates in Iran. A proper modeling would correctly detect the factors' effect on breast cancer, which may be the basis of health care planning. Therefore, this study aimed to practically develop two recently introduced statistical models in order to compare them as the survival prediction tools for breast cancer patients. Materials and Methods. For this retrospective cohort study, the 18-year follow-up information of 539 breast cancer patients was analyzed by "Parametric Mixture Cure Model" and "Model-Based Recursive Partitioning." Furthermore, a simulation study was carried out to compare the performance of mentioned models for different situations. Results. "Model-Based Recursive Partitioning" was able to present a better description of dataset and provided a fine separation of individuals with different risk levels. Additionally the results of simulation study confirmed the superiority of this recursive partitioning for nonlinear model structures. Conclusion. "Model-Based Recursive Partitioning" seems to be a potential instrument for processing complex mixture cure models. Therefore, applying this model is recommended for long-term survival patients.Entities:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27660647 PMCID: PMC5021906 DOI: 10.1155/2016/9425629
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Comput Math Methods Med ISSN: 1748-670X Impact factor: 2.238
Figure 1Kaplan-Meier plot of breast cancer patients' survival.
Results of Logistic-Weibull mixture cure model fitting on breast cancer patients' database.
| Estimate | Standard error | 95% confidence interval |
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lower | Upper | ||||
| Logistic part of cure model | |||||
| Intercept | −0.08 | 0.58 | −1.22 | 1.05 | 0.89 |
| Tumor size | 0.39 | 0.19 | 0.02 | 0.77 | 0.04 |
| Number of involved nodes | 0.05 | 0.09 | −0.11 | 0.22 | 0.53 |
|
| |||||
| Weibull part of cure model | |||||
| Scale | 7.99 | 0.20 | 7.60 | 8.38 | <0.05 |
| Shape | 0.62 | 0.04 | 0.54 | 0.70 | <0.05 |
| PR+ | 0.99 | 0.26 | 0.49 | 1.50 | <0.05 |
| ER+ | −0.46 | 0.24 | 0.05 | −0.93 | 0.05 |
| HER2+ | 0.44 | 0.22 | 0.01 | 0.87 | 0.04 |
| Radiotherapy | −0.43 | 0.21 | −0.85 | −0.01 | 0.05 |
|
| |||||
| AIC of cure model | 3759.0 | ||||
PR+: being progesterone receptor positive breast cancer patient; ER+: being estrogen receptor positive breast cancer patient; HER2+: being epidermal growth factor receptor-2 positive breast cancer patient.
Figure 2Model-Based Recursive Partitioning and Kaplan-Meier plots for each subset of population.
Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) of a simulation study for a population of size 500 observations and also with the shape parameter of size 2.
| Cure rate | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0% | 15% | 30% | ||||
| Model without interaction | ||||||
| Censoring rate | ||||||
| 40% | PMCM | MoBRP | PMCM | MoBRP | PMCM | MoBRP |
| 751.2 | 787.7 | 862.9 | 864.5 | 1151.3 | 1295.7 | |
| 60% | PMCM | MoBRP | PMCM | MoBRP | PMCM | MoBRP |
| 472.7 | 498.1 | 551.6 | 590.5 | 665.7 | 694.8 | |
| 80% | PMCM | MoBRP | PMCM | MoBRP | PMCM | MoBRP |
| 233.9 | 245.8 | 272.8 | 288.5 | 315.7 | 330.2 | |
|
| ||||||
| Model with interaction | ||||||
| Censoring rate | ||||||
| 40% | PMCM | MoBRP | PMCM | MoBRP | PMCM | MoBRP |
| 1287.9 | 1019.5 | 1384.3 | 1268.8 | 1582.7 | 1573.7 | |
| 60% | PMCM | MoBRP | PMCM | MoBRP | PMCM | MoBRP |
| 822.8 | 747.6 | 841.2 | 739.1 | 907.2 | 823.6 | |
| 80% | PMCM | MoBRP | PMCM | MoBRP | PMCM | MoBRP |
| 384.3 | 323.5 | 382.5 | 331.7 | 394.9 | 362.4 | |
Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) of a simulation study for a population of size 1000 observations and also with the shape parameter of size 2.
| Cure rate | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0% | 15% | 30% | ||||
| Model without interaction | ||||||
| Censoring rate | ||||||
| 40% | PMCM | MoBRP | PMCM | MoBRP | PMCM | MoBRP |
| 1397.1 | 1482.9 | 1802.1 | 1915.2 | 2256.1 | 2525.1 | |
| 60% | PMCM | MoBRP | PMCM | MoBRP | PMCM | MoBRP |
| 926.9 | 975.8 | 1106.6 | 1181.6 | 1312.6 | 1309.9 | |
| 80% | PMCM | MoBRP | PMCM | MoBRP | PMCM | MoBRP |
| 489.3 | 519.3 | 550.6 | 572.7 | 613.6 | 650.6 | |
|
| ||||||
| Model with interaction | ||||||
| Censoring rate | ||||||
| 40% | PMCM | MoBRP | PMCM | MoBRP | PMCM | MoBRP |
| 2583.8 | 2209.8 | 2793.4 | 2442.1 | 3180.7 | 3032.7 | |
| 60% | PMCM | MoBRP | PMCM | MoBRP | PMCM | MoBRP |
| 1621.3 | 1492.2 | 1683.7 | 1416.0 | 1813.7 | 1525.5 | |
| 80% | PMCM | MoBRP | PMCM | MoBRP | PMCM | MoBRP |
| 730.0 | 625.0 | 758.9 | 635.1 | 782.9 | 693.4 | |
Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) of a simulation study for a population of size 500 observations and also with the shape parameter of size 0.5.
| Cure rate | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0% | 15% | 30% | ||||
| Model without interaction | ||||||
| Censoring rate | ||||||
| 40% | PMCM | MoBRP | PMCM | MoBRP | PMCM | MoBRP |
| 1856.18 | 1861.86 | 2494.85 | 2546.09 | 2729.86 | 2778.33 | |
| 60% | PMCM | MoBRP | PMCM | MoBRP | PMCM | MoBRP |
| 1066.41 | 1080.39 | 1641.47 | 1638.89 | 1646.18 | 1707.90 | |
| 80% | PMCM | MoBRP | PMCM | MoBRP | PMCM | MoBRP |
| 457.14 | 477.88 | 814.69 | 851.95 | 848.36 | 874.43 | |
|
| ||||||
| Model with interaction | ||||||
| Censoring rate | ||||||
| 40% | PMCM | MoBRP | PMCM | MoBRP | PMCM | MoBRP |
| 3090.44 | 2751.21 | 3153.18 | 2911.67 | 3458.61 | 3220.91 | |
| 60% | PMCM | MoBRP | PMCM | MoBRP | PMCM | MoBRP |
| 1801.99 | 1641.78 | 1825.50 | 1674.54 | 1989.8 | 1869.79 | |
| 80% | PMCM | MoBRP | PMCM | MoBRP | PMCM | MoBRP |
| 752.21 | 652.69 | 770.28 | 654.37 | 772.32 | 672.06 | |