Time-varying effect in older patients with early-stage breast cancer: a model considering the competing risks based on a time scale.

Zhiyin Yu, Xiang Geng, Zhaojin Li, Chengfeng Zhang, Yawen Hou, Derun Zhou, Zheng Chen
Author Information
  1. Zhiyin Yu: Department of Biostatistics, School of Public Health (Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Tropical Disease Research), Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
  2. Xiang Geng: Department of Biostatistics, School of Public Health (Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Tropical Disease Research), Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
  3. Zhaojin Li: Department of Biostatistics, School of Public Health (Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Tropical Disease Research), Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
  4. Chengfeng Zhang: Department of Biostatistics, School of Public Health (Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Tropical Disease Research), Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
  5. Yawen Hou: Department of Statistics and Data Science, School of Economics, Jinan University, Guangzhou, China.
  6. Derun Zhou: Department of Biostatistics, School of Public Health (Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Tropical Disease Research), Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
  7. Zheng Chen: Department of Biostatistics, School of Public Health (Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Tropical Disease Research), Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.

Abstract

Background: Patients with early-stage breast cancer may have a higher risk of dying from other diseases, making a competing risks model more appropriate. Considering subdistribution hazard ratio, which is used often, limited to model assumptions and clinical interpretation, we aimed to quantify the effects of prognostic factors by an absolute indicator, the difference in restricted mean time lost (RMTL), which is more intuitive. Additionally, prognostic factors of breast cancer may have dynamic effects (time-varying effects) in long-term follow-up. However, existing competing risks regression models only provide a static view of covariate effects, leading to a distorted assessment of the prognostic factor.
Methods: To address this issue, we proposed a dynamic effect RMTL regression that can explore the between-group cumulative difference in mean life lost over a period of time and obtain the real-time effect by the speed of accumulation, as well as personalized predictions on a time scale.
Results: A simulation validated the accuracy of the coefficient estimates in the proposed regression. Applying this model to an older early-stage breast cancer cohort, it was found that 1) the protective effects of positive estrogen receptor and chemotherapy decreased over time; 2) the protective effect of breast-conserving surgery increased over time; and 3) the deleterious effects of stage T2, stage N2, and histologic grade II cancer increased over time. Moreover, from the view of prediction, the mean C-index in external validation reached 0.78.
Conclusion: Dynamic effect RMTL regression can analyze both dynamic cumulative effects and real-time effects of covariates, providing a more comprehensive prognosis and better prediction when competing risks exist.

Keywords

References

  1. Endocr Relat Cancer. 2018 May;25(5):509-521 [PMID: 29472247]
  2. BMJ. 2022 Sep 13;378:e071349 [PMID: 36100269]
  3. J Clin Oncol. 2004 Feb 1;22(3):432-8 [PMID: 14691121]
  4. Ann Oncol. 2015 Jun;26(6):1254-1262 [PMID: 25862439]
  5. Stat Med. 2013 Dec 30;32(30):5278-85 [PMID: 23839860]
  6. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2020 Jul 25;20(1):197 [PMID: 32711456]
  7. PLoS One. 2014 Oct 21;9(10):e110281 [PMID: 25333877]
  8. Br J Cancer. 2015 Jun 30;113(1):30-6 [PMID: 26079300]
  9. Stat Med. 2022 Sep 20;41(21):4081-4090 [PMID: 35746886]
  10. Ann Surg Oncol. 2021 Sep;28(9):5039-5047 [PMID: 33492542]
  11. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2012 Jan 31;9(3):178-83 [PMID: 22290283]
  12. Int J Epidemiol. 2022 May 9;51(2):615-625 [PMID: 34919691]
  13. Lifetime Data Anal. 2022 Oct;28(4):675-699 [PMID: 35962886]
  14. J Clin Epidemiol. 2020 Jun;122:42-48 [PMID: 32165133]
  15. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2018 Mar 1;110(3):232-240 [PMID: 29933439]
  16. Ann Surg Oncol. 2022 Oct;29(10):6163-6188 [PMID: 35876923]
  17. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2019 Nov;178(1):221-230 [PMID: 31368035]
  18. Clin Cancer Res. 2012 Apr 15;18(8):2301-8 [PMID: 22282466]
  19. Stat Med. 2021 Apr;40(9):2177-2196 [PMID: 33567477]
  20. Biometrics. 2022 Mar;78(1):192-201 [PMID: 33616953]
  21. BMJ. 2022 May 24;377:e069249 [PMID: 35609902]
  22. Am J Epidemiol. 2022 Jan 1;191(1):163-172 [PMID: 34550319]
  23. Cancer. 2018 May 15;124(10):2184-2191 [PMID: 29499074]
  24. Technol Cancer Res Treat. 2021 Jan-Dec;20:15330338211016371 [PMID: 34013802]
  25. Sci Rep. 2022 Jan 7;12(1):220 [PMID: 34997151]
  26. Biom J. 2020 May;62(3):822-835 [PMID: 30908745]
  27. Am J Epidemiol. 2009 Jun 15;169(12):1463-70 [PMID: 19403844]
  28. JAMA Cardiol. 2018 Apr 1;3(4):357-358 [PMID: 29541747]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0effectstimeeffectbreastcancercompetingrisksmodelmeandynamicregressionearly-stageprognosticlostRMTLpredictionmayfactorsdifferencerestrictedviewproposedcancumulativereal-timepersonalizedscaleolderprotectiveincreasedstageBackground:PatientshigherriskdyingdiseasesmakingappropriateConsideringsubdistributionhazardratiousedoftenlimitedassumptionsclinicalinterpretationaimedquantifyabsoluteindicatorintuitiveAdditionallytime-varyinglong-termfollow-upHoweverexistingmodelsprovidestaticcovariateleadingdistortedassessmentfactorMethods:addressissueexplorebetween-grouplifeperiodobtainspeedaccumulationwellpredictionsResults:simulationvalidatedaccuracycoefficientestimatesApplyingcohortfound1positiveestrogenreceptorchemotherapydecreased2breast-conservingsurgery3deleteriousT2N2histologicgradeIIMoreoverC-indexexternalvalidationreached078Conclusion:DynamicanalyzecovariatesprovidingcomprehensiveprognosisbetterexistTime-varyingpatientscancer:consideringbased

Similar Articles

Cited By