Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Medical Research Methodology 1/2019

Open Access 01-12-2019 | Metastasis | Research article

Dynamic prediction of repeated events data based on landmarking model: application to colorectal liver metastases data

Authors: Isao Yokota, Yutaka Matsuyama

Published in: BMC Medical Research Methodology | Issue 1/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

In some clinical situations, patients experience repeated events of the same type. Among these, cancer recurrences can result in terminal events such as death. Therefore, here we dynamically predicted the risks of repeated and terminal events given longitudinal histories observed before prediction time using dynamic pseudo-observations (DPOs) in a landmarking model.

Methods

The proposed DPOs were calculated using Aalen–Johansen estimator for the event processes described in the multi-state model. Furthermore, in the absence of a terminal event, a more convenient approach without matrix operation was described using the ordering of repeated events. Finally, generalized estimating equations were used to calculate probabilities of repeated and terminal events, which were treated as multinomial outcomes.

Results

Simulation studies were conducted to assess bias and investigate the efficiency of the proposed DPOs in a finite sample. Little bias was detected in DPOs even under relatively heavy censoring, and the method was applied to data from patients with colorectal liver metastases.

Conclusions

The proposed method enabled intuitive interpretations of terminal event settings.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Oba M, Hasegawa K, Matsuyama Y, Shindoh J, Mise Y, Aoki T, et al. Discrepancy between recurrence-free survival and overall survival in patients with resectable colorectal liver metastases: a potential surrogate endpoint for time to surgical failure. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014;21:1817–24.CrossRef Oba M, Hasegawa K, Matsuyama Y, Shindoh J, Mise Y, Aoki T, et al. Discrepancy between recurrence-free survival and overall survival in patients with resectable colorectal liver metastases: a potential surrogate endpoint for time to surgical failure. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014;21:1817–24.CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Cox DR. Regression models and lifetables (with discussion). J R Stat Soc B. 1972;34:187–220. Cox DR. Regression models and lifetables (with discussion). J R Stat Soc B. 1972;34:187–220.
3.
go back to reference Wei LJ, Lin DY, Weissfeld L. Regression analysis of multivariate incomplete failure time data by modeling marginal distributions. J Am Stat Assoc. 1989;84:1065–73.CrossRef Wei LJ, Lin DY, Weissfeld L. Regression analysis of multivariate incomplete failure time data by modeling marginal distributions. J Am Stat Assoc. 1989;84:1065–73.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Cook RJ, Lawless JF. Marginal analysis of recurrent events and a terminating event. Stat Med. 1997;16:911–24.CrossRef Cook RJ, Lawless JF. Marginal analysis of recurrent events and a terminating event. Stat Med. 1997;16:911–24.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Wang MC, Qin J, Chiang CT. Analyzing recurrent event data with informative censoring. J Am Stat Assoc. 2001;96:1057–65.CrossRef Wang MC, Qin J, Chiang CT. Analyzing recurrent event data with informative censoring. J Am Stat Assoc. 2001;96:1057–65.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Liu L, Wolfe RA, Huang XL. Shared frailty models for recurrent events and a terminal event. Biometrics. 2004;60:747–56.CrossRef Liu L, Wolfe RA, Huang XL. Shared frailty models for recurrent events and a terminal event. Biometrics. 2004;60:747–56.CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Ye Y, Kalbfleisch JD, Schaubel DE. Semiparametric analysis of correlated recurrent and terminal Eeents. Biometrics. 2007;63:78–87.CrossRef Ye Y, Kalbfleisch JD, Schaubel DE. Semiparametric analysis of correlated recurrent and terminal Eeents. Biometrics. 2007;63:78–87.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Fine JP, Jiang H, Chappell R. On semi-competing risks data. Biometrika. 2001;88:907–19.CrossRef Fine JP, Jiang H, Chappell R. On semi-competing risks data. Biometrika. 2001;88:907–19.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Zhou R, Zhu H, Bondy M, Ning J. Semiparametric model for semi-competing risks data with application to breast cancer study. Lifetime Data Anal. 2016;22:456–71.CrossRef Zhou R, Zhu H, Bondy M, Ning J. Semiparametric model for semi-competing risks data with application to breast cancer study. Lifetime Data Anal. 2016;22:456–71.CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Xu JF, Kalbfleisch JD, Tai BC. Statistical analysis of illness-death processes and semicompeting risks data. Biometrics. 2010;66:716–25.CrossRef Xu JF, Kalbfleisch JD, Tai BC. Statistical analysis of illness-death processes and semicompeting risks data. Biometrics. 2010;66:716–25.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Kalbfleish JD, Prentice RL. The statistical analysis of failure time data, second edition. Hoboken: Wiley; 2002.CrossRef Kalbfleish JD, Prentice RL. The statistical analysis of failure time data, second edition. Hoboken: Wiley; 2002.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Cortese G, Andersen PK. Competing risks and time-dependent covariates. Biom J. 2009;51:138–58. Cortese G, Andersen PK. Competing risks and time-dependent covariates. Biom J. 2009;51:138–58.
13.
go back to reference Cortese G, Gerds TA, Andersen PK. Comparing predictions among competing risks models with time-dependent covariates. Stat Med. 2013;32:3089–101.CrossRef Cortese G, Gerds TA, Andersen PK. Comparing predictions among competing risks models with time-dependent covariates. Stat Med. 2013;32:3089–101.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Maziarz M, Heagerty P, Cai T, Zheng Y. On longitudinal prediction with time-to-event outcome: comparison of modeling options. Biometrics. 2017;73:83–93.CrossRef Maziarz M, Heagerty P, Cai T, Zheng Y. On longitudinal prediction with time-to-event outcome: comparison of modeling options. Biometrics. 2017;73:83–93.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Suresh K, Taylor JMG, Spratt DE, Daignault S, Tsodikov A. Comparison of joint modeling and landmarking for dynamic prediction under an illness-death model. Biom J. 2017;59:1277–300.CrossRef Suresh K, Taylor JMG, Spratt DE, Daignault S, Tsodikov A. Comparison of joint modeling and landmarking for dynamic prediction under an illness-death model. Biom J. 2017;59:1277–300.CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Rizopoulos D. Dynamic predictions and prospective accuracy in joint models for longitudinal and time-to-event data. Biometrics. 2011;67:819–29.CrossRef Rizopoulos D. Dynamic predictions and prospective accuracy in joint models for longitudinal and time-to-event data. Biometrics. 2011;67:819–29.CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Rizopoulos D. Joint models for longitudinal and time-to-event data, with applications in R. Boca Raton: CRC; 2012.CrossRef Rizopoulos D. Joint models for longitudinal and time-to-event data, with applications in R. Boca Raton: CRC; 2012.CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Mauguen A, Rachet B, Mathoulin-Pélissier S, MacGrogan G, Laurent A, Rondeau V. Dynamic prediction of risk of death using history of cancer recurrences in joint frailty models. Stat Med. 2013;32:5366–80.CrossRef Mauguen A, Rachet B, Mathoulin-Pélissier S, MacGrogan G, Laurent A, Rondeau V. Dynamic prediction of risk of death using history of cancer recurrences in joint frailty models. Stat Med. 2013;32:5366–80.CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Taylor JMG, Park Y, Ankerst DP, Bae K, Pickles T, Sandler H. Real-time individual predictions of prostate cancer recurrence using joint models. Biometrics. 2013;69:206–13.CrossRef Taylor JMG, Park Y, Ankerst DP, Bae K, Pickles T, Sandler H. Real-time individual predictions of prostate cancer recurrence using joint models. Biometrics. 2013;69:206–13.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Hickey GL, Philipson P, Jorgensen A, Kolamunnage-Dona R. Joint modelling of time-to-event and multivariate longitudinal outcomes: recent developments and issues. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2016;16:117.CrossRef Hickey GL, Philipson P, Jorgensen A, Kolamunnage-Dona R. Joint modelling of time-to-event and multivariate longitudinal outcomes: recent developments and issues. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2016;16:117.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Zheng Y, Heagerty PJ. Partly conditional survival models for longitudinal data. Biometrics. 2005;61:371–91. Zheng Y, Heagerty PJ. Partly conditional survival models for longitudinal data. Biometrics. 2005;61:371–91.
22.
go back to reference van Houwelingen HC. Dynamic prediction by landmarking in event history analysis. Scand Stat Theory Appl. 2007;34:70–85.CrossRef van Houwelingen HC. Dynamic prediction by landmarking in event history analysis. Scand Stat Theory Appl. 2007;34:70–85.CrossRef
23.
go back to reference van Houwelingen HC, Putter H. Dynamic prediction in clinical survival analysis. Boca Raton: CRC; 2011. van Houwelingen HC, Putter H. Dynamic prediction in clinical survival analysis. Boca Raton: CRC; 2011.
24.
go back to reference Musoro JZ, Struijk GH, Geskus RB, Ten Berge I, Zwinderman AH. Dynamic prediction of recurrent events data by landmarking with application to a follow-up study of patients after kidney transplant. Stat Methods Med Res. 2018;27:832–45.CrossRef Musoro JZ, Struijk GH, Geskus RB, Ten Berge I, Zwinderman AH. Dynamic prediction of recurrent events data by landmarking with application to a follow-up study of patients after kidney transplant. Stat Methods Med Res. 2018;27:832–45.CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Huang X, Yan F, Ning J, Feng Z, Choi S, Cortes J. A two-stage approach for dynamic prediction of time-to-event distributions. Stat Med. 2016;35:2167–82.CrossRef Huang X, Yan F, Ning J, Feng Z, Choi S, Cortes J. A two-stage approach for dynamic prediction of time-to-event distributions. Stat Med. 2016;35:2167–82.CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Parast L, Cai T. Landmark risk prediction of residual life for breast cancer survival. Stat Med. 2013;32:3459–71.CrossRef Parast L, Cai T. Landmark risk prediction of residual life for breast cancer survival. Stat Med. 2013;32:3459–71.CrossRef
27.
go back to reference Fine JP, Gray RJ. A proportional hazards model for the subdistribution of a competing risk. J Am Stat Assoc. 1999;94:496–509.CrossRef Fine JP, Gray RJ. A proportional hazards model for the subdistribution of a competing risk. J Am Stat Assoc. 1999;94:496–509.CrossRef
28.
go back to reference Nicolaie MA, van Houwelingen JC, de Witte TM, Putter H. Dynamic prediction by landmarking in competing risks. Stat Med. 2013;32:2031–47.CrossRef Nicolaie MA, van Houwelingen JC, de Witte TM, Putter H. Dynamic prediction by landmarking in competing risks. Stat Med. 2013;32:2031–47.CrossRef
29.
go back to reference Nicolaie MA, van Houwelingen JC, de Witte TM, Putter H. Dynamic pseudo-observations: a robust approach to dynamic prediction in competing risks. Biometrics. 2013;69:1043–52.CrossRef Nicolaie MA, van Houwelingen JC, de Witte TM, Putter H. Dynamic pseudo-observations: a robust approach to dynamic prediction in competing risks. Biometrics. 2013;69:1043–52.CrossRef
30.
go back to reference Pötschger U, Heinzl H, Valsecchi MG, Mittlböck M. Assessing the effect of a partly unobserved, exogenous, binary time-dependent covariate on survival probabilities using generalised pseudo-values. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018;18:14.CrossRef Pötschger U, Heinzl H, Valsecchi MG, Mittlböck M. Assessing the effect of a partly unobserved, exogenous, binary time-dependent covariate on survival probabilities using generalised pseudo-values. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018;18:14.CrossRef
31.
go back to reference Graw F, Gerds TA, Schumacher M. On pseudo-values for regression analysis in competing risks models. Lifetime Data Anal. 2009;15:241–55.CrossRef Graw F, Gerds TA, Schumacher M. On pseudo-values for regression analysis in competing risks models. Lifetime Data Anal. 2009;15:241–55.CrossRef
32.
go back to reference Jacobsen M, Martinussen T. A note on the large sample properties of estimators based on generalized linear models for correlated pseudo-observations. Scand Stat Theory Appl. 2016;43:845–62.CrossRef Jacobsen M, Martinussen T. A note on the large sample properties of estimators based on generalized linear models for correlated pseudo-observations. Scand Stat Theory Appl. 2016;43:845–62.CrossRef
33.
go back to reference Overgaard M, Parner ET, Pedersen J. Asymptotic theory of generalized estimating equations based on jack-knife pseudo-observations. Ann Stat. 2017;45:1988–2015.CrossRef Overgaard M, Parner ET, Pedersen J. Asymptotic theory of generalized estimating equations based on jack-knife pseudo-observations. Ann Stat. 2017;45:1988–2015.CrossRef
34.
go back to reference Andersen PK, Klein JP, Rosthoj S. Generalised linear models for correlated pseudo-observations, with applications to multi-state models. Biometrika. 2003;90:15–27.CrossRef Andersen PK, Klein JP, Rosthoj S. Generalised linear models for correlated pseudo-observations, with applications to multi-state models. Biometrika. 2003;90:15–27.CrossRef
35.
go back to reference Aalen OO, Johansen S. An empirical transition matrix for nonhomogeneous Markov-chains based on censored observations. Scand Stat Theory Appl. 1978;5:141–50. Aalen OO, Johansen S. An empirical transition matrix for nonhomogeneous Markov-chains based on censored observations. Scand Stat Theory Appl. 1978;5:141–50.
36.
go back to reference Andersen PK, Borgan O, Gill RD, Keiding N. Statistical models based on counting processes. NewYork: Springer-Verlag; 1993.CrossRef Andersen PK, Borgan O, Gill RD, Keiding N. Statistical models based on counting processes. NewYork: Springer-Verlag; 1993.CrossRef
37.
go back to reference Datta S, Satten GA. Validity of the Aalen–Johansen estimators of stage occupation probabilities and Nelson–Aalen estimators of integrated transition hazards for non-Markov models. Stat Probab Lett. 2001;55:403–11.CrossRef Datta S, Satten GA. Validity of the Aalen–Johansen estimators of stage occupation probabilities and Nelson–Aalen estimators of integrated transition hazards for non-Markov models. Stat Probab Lett. 2001;55:403–11.CrossRef
38.
go back to reference Kaplan EL, Meier P. Nonparametric estimation from incomplete observations. J Am Stat Assoc. 1958;53:457–81.CrossRef Kaplan EL, Meier P. Nonparametric estimation from incomplete observations. J Am Stat Assoc. 1958;53:457–81.CrossRef
39.
go back to reference Hartzel J, Agresti A, Caffo B. Multinomial logit random effects models. Stat Modelling. 2001;1:81–102.CrossRef Hartzel J, Agresti A, Caffo B. Multinomial logit random effects models. Stat Modelling. 2001;1:81–102.CrossRef
40.
go back to reference Kuss O, McLerran D. A note on the estimation of the multinomial logistic model with correlated responses in SAS. Comput Methods Prog Biomed. 2007;87:262–9.CrossRef Kuss O, McLerran D. A note on the estimation of the multinomial logistic model with correlated responses in SAS. Comput Methods Prog Biomed. 2007;87:262–9.CrossRef
41.
go back to reference Liang KY, Zeger SL. Longitudinal data analysis using generalized linear models. Biometrika. 1986;73:13–22.CrossRef Liang KY, Zeger SL. Longitudinal data analysis using generalized linear models. Biometrika. 1986;73:13–22.CrossRef
42.
go back to reference Kurland BF, Heagerty PJ. Directly parameterized regression conditioning on being alive: analysis of longitudinal data truncated by deaths. Biostatistics. 2005;6:241–58.CrossRef Kurland BF, Heagerty PJ. Directly parameterized regression conditioning on being alive: analysis of longitudinal data truncated by deaths. Biostatistics. 2005;6:241–58.CrossRef
43.
go back to reference Graf E, Schmoor C, Sauerbrei W, Schumacher M. Assessment and comparison of prognostic classification schemes for survival data. Stat Med. 1999;18:2529–45.CrossRef Graf E, Schmoor C, Sauerbrei W, Schumacher M. Assessment and comparison of prognostic classification schemes for survival data. Stat Med. 1999;18:2529–45.CrossRef
44.
go back to reference Schoop R, Beyersmann J, Schumacher M, Binder H. Quantifying the predictive accuracy of time-to-event models in the presence of competing risks. Biom J. 2011;53:88–112.CrossRef Schoop R, Beyersmann J, Schumacher M, Binder H. Quantifying the predictive accuracy of time-to-event models in the presence of competing risks. Biom J. 2011;53:88–112.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Dynamic prediction of repeated events data based on landmarking model: application to colorectal liver metastases data
Authors
Isao Yokota
Yutaka Matsuyama
Publication date
01-12-2019
Publisher
BioMed Central
Keyword
Metastasis
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology / Issue 1/2019
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2288
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-019-0677-0

Other articles of this Issue 1/2019

BMC Medical Research Methodology 1/2019 Go to the issue