Literature DB >> 29056817

Estimating treatment effects in observational studies with both prevalent and incident cohorts.

Jing Ning1, Chuan Hong2, Liang Li1, Xuelin Huang1, Yu Shen1.   

Abstract

Registry databases are increasingly being used for comparative effectiveness research in cancer. Such databases reflect the real-world patient population and physician practice, and thus are natural sources for comparing multiple treatment scenarios and the associated long-term clinical outcomes. Registry databases usually include both incident and prevalent cohorts, which provide valuable complementary information for patients with more recent diagnoses in the incident cohort as well as patients with long-term follow-up data in the prevalent cohort. However, utilizing such data to derive valid inference poses two major challenges: the data from a prevalent cohort are not random samples of the target population, and there may be substantial differences in the baseline characteristics of patients between treatment arms, which influences the decisions about treatment selection in both cohorts. In this article, we extend propensity score methodology to observational studies that involve both prevalent and incident cohorts, and assess the effectiveness of radiation therapy in SEER-Medicare patients diagnosed with stage IV breast cancer. Specifically, we utilize the incident cohort to estimate the propensity for receiving radiation therapy, and then combine data from both the incident and prevalent cohorts to estimate the effect of radiation therapy by adjusting for the propensity scores in the model. We evaluate the proposed method with simulations. We demonstrate that the proposed propensity score method simultaneously removes sampling bias and selection bias under several assumptions.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Incident cohort; Prevalent cohort; Propensity score; Sampling bias; Selection bias

Year:  2017        PMID: 29056817      PMCID: PMC5646711          DOI: 10.1002/cjs.11317

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Can J Stat        ISSN: 0319-5724            Impact factor:   0.875


  13 in total

Review 1.  A critical appraisal of propensity-score matching in the medical literature between 1996 and 2003.

Authors:  Peter C Austin
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2008-05-30       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  A weighting analogue to pair matching in propensity score analysis.

Authors:  Liang Li; Tom Greene
Journal:  Int J Biostat       Date:  2013-07-31       Impact factor: 0.968

3.  Comment: Demystifying Double Robustness: A Comparison of Alternative Strategies for Estimating a Population Mean from Incomplete Data.

Authors:  Anastasios A Tsiatis; Marie Davidian
Journal:  Stat Sci       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 2.901

4.  Propensity score methods for bias reduction in the comparison of a treatment to a non-randomized control group.

Authors:  R B D'Agostino
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1998-10-15       Impact factor: 2.373

5.  Analyzing Length-biased Data with Semiparametric Transformation and Accelerated Failure Time Models.

Authors:  Yu Shen; Jing Ning; Jing Qin
Journal:  J Am Stat Assoc       Date:  2009-09-01       Impact factor: 5.033

6.  Survival analysis without survival data: connecting length-biased and case-control data.

Authors:  Kwun Chuen Gary Chan
Journal:  Biometrika       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 2.445

7.  Propensity Score Estimation in the Presence of Length-biased Sampling: A Nonparametric Adjustment Approach.

Authors:  Ashkan Ertefaie; Masoud Asgharian; David Stephens
Journal:  Stat       Date:  2014-01-01

8.  Estimating propensity scores and causal survival functions using prevalent survival data.

Authors:  Yu-Jen Cheng; Mei-Cheng Wang
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2012-07-26       Impact factor: 2.571

9.  Statistical models for prevalent cohort data.

Authors:  M C Wang; R Brookmeyer; N P Jewell
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1993-03       Impact factor: 2.571

10.  Statistical methods for analyzing right-censored length-biased data under cox model.

Authors:  Jing Qin; Yu Shen
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2009-06-12       Impact factor: 2.571

View more
  1 in total

1.  A risk set adjustment for proportional hazards modeling of combined cohort data.

Authors:  J H McVittie; V Addona
Journal:  J Appl Stat       Date:  2021-05-12       Impact factor: 1.416

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.