Dataset Information

On longitudinal prediction with time-to-event outcome: Comparison of modeling options.

ABSTRACT: Long-term follow-up is common in many medical investigations where the interest lies in predicting patients' risks for a future adverse outcome using repeatedly measured predictors over time. A key quantity is the likelihood of developing an adverse outcome among individuals who survived up to time s given their covariate information up to time s. Simple, yet reliable, methodology for updating the predicted risk of disease progression using longitudinal markers remains elusive. Two main approaches have been considered in the literature. One approach, based on joint modeling (JM) of failure time and longitudinal covariate process (Tsiatis and Davidian, 2004), derives such longitudinal predictive probability from the joint probability of a longitudinal marker and an event at a given time. A second approach, the partly conditional (PC) modeling (Zheng and Heagerty, 2005), directly models the predictive probability conditional on survival up to a landmark time and information accrued by that time. In this article, we propose new PC models for longitudinal prediction that are more flexible than joint modeling and improve the prediction accuracy over existing PC models. We provide procedures for making inference regarding future risk for an individual with longitudinal measures up to a given time. In addition, we conduct simulations to evaluate both JM and PC approaches in order to provide practical guidance on modeling choices. We use standard measures of predictive accuracy adapted to our setting to explore the predictiveness of the two approaches. We illustrate the performance of the two approaches on a dataset from the End Stage Renal Disease Study (ESRDS).

SUBMITTER: Maziarz M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5250577 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

On longitudinal prediction with time-to-event outcome: Comparison of modeling options.

Maziarz Marlena M Heagerty Patrick P Cai Tianxi T Zheng Yingye Y

Biometrics 20160720 1

Long-term follow-up is common in many medical investigations where the interest lies in predicting patients' risks for a future adverse outcome using repeatedly measured predictors over time. A key quantity is the likelihood of developing an adverse outcome among individuals who survived up to time s given their covariate information up to time s. Simple, yet reliable, methodology for updating the predicted risk of disease progression using longitudinal markers remains elusive. Two main approach ...[more]

PMID: 27438160

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Choosing the most performing method in terms of outcome prediction or variables selection is a recurring problem in prognosis studies, leading to many publications on methods comparison. But some aspects have received little attention. First, most comparison studies treat prediction performance and variable selection aspects separately. Second, methods are either compared within a binary outcome setting (where we want to predict whether the readmission will occur within an arbitrarily chosen delay or not) or within a survival analysis setting (where the outcomes are directly the censored times), but not both. In this paper, we propose a comparison methodology to weight up those different settings both in terms of prediction and variables selection, while incorporating advanced machine learning strategies. METHODS:Using a high-dimensional case study on a sickle-cell disease (SCD) cohort, we compare 8 statistical methods. In the binary outcome setting, we consider logistic regression (LR), support vector machine (SVM), random forest (RF), gradient boosting (GB) and neural network (NN); while on the survival analysis setting, we consider the Cox Proportional Hazards (PH), the CURE and the C-mix models. We also propose a method using Gaussian Processes to extract meaningfull structured covariates from longitudinal data. RESULTS:Among all assessed statistical methods, the survival analysis ones obtain the best results. In particular the C-mix model yields the better performances in both the two considered settings (AUC =0.94 in the binary outcome setting), as well as interesting interpretation aspects. There is some consistency in selected covariates across methods within a setting, but not much across the two settings. CONCLUSIONS:It appears that learning withing the survival analysis setting first (so using all the temporal information), and then going back to a binary prediction using the survival estimates gives significantly better prediction performances than the ones obtained by models trained "directly" within the binary outcome setting.

Dataset Information

On longitudinal prediction with time-to-event outcome: Comparison of modeling options.

Publications

On longitudinal prediction with time-to-event outcome: Comparison of modeling options.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets