4.5 Article

Individual frailty excess hazard models in cancer epidemiology

期刊

STATISTICS IN MEDICINE
卷 42, 期 7, 页码 1066-1081

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/sim.9657

关键词

excess hazard; flexible; frailties; general hazard; net survival

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Unobserved individual heterogeneity is a common challenge in population cancer survival studies. We propose an individual excess hazard frailty model to account for individual heterogeneity and investigate its effects in the context of excess hazard models. The methodology is implemented in the R package IFNS and is illustrated through simulation and real-data examples.
Unobserved individual heterogeneity is a common challenge in population cancer survival studies. This heterogeneity is usually associated with the combination of model misspecification and the failure to record truly relevant variables. We investigate the effects of unobserved individual heterogeneity in the context of excess hazard models, one of the main tools in cancer epidemiology. We propose an individual excess hazard frailty model to account for individual heterogeneity. This represents an extension of frailty modeling to the relative survival framework. In order to facilitate the inference on the parameters of the proposed model, we select frailty distributions which produce closed-form expressions of the marginal hazard and survival functions. The resulting model allows for an intuitive interpretation, in which the frailties induce a selection of the healthier individuals among survivors. We model the excess hazard using a flexible parametric model with a general hazard structure which facilitates the inclusion of time-dependent effects. We illustrate the performance of the proposed methodology through a simulation study. We present a real-data example using data from lung cancer patients diagnosed in England, and discuss the impact of not accounting for unobserved heterogeneity on the estimation of net survival. The methodology is implemented in the R package IFNS.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据