IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v41y2021i2p179-193.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Extrapolation of Survival Curves Using Standard Parametric Models and Flexible Parametric Spline Models: Comparisons in Large Registry Cohorts with Advanced Cancer

Author

Listed:
  • Jodi Gray

    (Flinders Health and Medical Research Institute (FHMRI), Flinders University, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia)

  • Thomas Sullivan

    (South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute (SAHMRI), Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
    School of Public Health, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia)

  • Nicholas R. Latimer

    (School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, South Yorkshire, UK)

  • Amy Salter

    (School of Public Health, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia)

  • Michael J. Sorich

    (Flinders Health and Medical Research Institute (FHMRI), Flinders University, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia)

  • Robyn L. Ward

    (Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia)

  • Jonathan Karnon

    (Flinders Health and Medical Research Institute (FHMRI), Flinders University, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia)

Abstract

Background It is often important to extrapolate survival estimates beyond the limited follow-up times of clinical trials. Extrapolated survival estimates can be highly sensitive to model choice; thus, appropriate model selection is crucial. Flexible parametric spline models have been suggested as an alternative to standard parametric models; however, their ability to extrapolate is not well understood. Aim To determine how well standard parametric and flexible parametric spline models predict survival when fitted to registry cohorts with artificially right-censored follow-up times. Methods Adults with advanced breast, colorectal, small cell lung, non–small cell lung, or pancreatic cancer with a potential follow-up time of 10 y were selected from the SEER 1973–2015 registry data set. Patients were classified into 15 cohorts by cancer and age group at diagnosis (18–59, 60–69, 70+ y). Follow-up times for each cohort were right censored at 20%, 35%, and 50% survival. Standard parametric models (exponential, Weibull, Gompertz, log-logistic, log-normal, generalized gamma) and spline models (proportional hazards, proportional odds, normal/probit) were fitted to the 10-y data set and the 3 right-censored data sets. Predicted 10-y restricted mean survival time and percentage surviving at 10 y were compared with the observed values. Results Across all data sets, the spline odds and spline normal models most frequently gave accurate predictions of 10-y survival outcomes. Visually, spline models tended to demonstrate better fit to the observed hazard functions than standard parametric models, both in the censored and 10-y data. Conclusions In these cohorts, where there was little uncertainty in the observed data, the spline models performed well when extrapolating beyond the observed data. Spline models should be routinely included in the set of models that are fitted when extrapolating cancer survival data.

Suggested Citation

  • Jodi Gray & Thomas Sullivan & Nicholas R. Latimer & Amy Salter & Michael J. Sorich & Robyn L. Ward & Jonathan Karnon, 2021. "Extrapolation of Survival Curves Using Standard Parametric Models and Flexible Parametric Spline Models: Comparisons in Large Registry Cohorts with Advanced Cancer," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 41(2), pages 179-193, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:41:y:2021:i:2:p:179-193
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X20978958
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X20978958
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X20978958?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jackson, Christopher, 2016. "flexsurv: A Platform for Parametric Survival Modeling in R," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 70(i08).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Taihang Shao & Mingye Zhao & Leyi Liang & Lizheng Shi & Wenxi Tang, 2023. "Impact of Extrapolation Model Choices on the Structural Uncertainty in Economic Evaluations for Cancer Immunotherapy: A Case Study of Checkmate 067," PharmacoEconomics - Open, Springer, vol. 7(3), pages 383-392, May.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Elizabeth G Bond & Lusine Abrahamyan & Mohammad K A Khan & Andrea Gershon & Murray Krahn & Ping Li & Rajibul Mian & Nicholas Mitsakakis & Mohsen Sadatsafavi & Teresa To & Petros Pechlivanoglou & for t, 2020. "Understanding resource utilization and mortality in COPD to support policy making: A microsimulation study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(8), pages 1-16, August.
    2. Sharples, Linda D., 2018. "The role of statistics in the era of big data: Electronic health records for healthcare research," Statistics & Probability Letters, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 105-110.
    3. Suvra Pal & Hongbo Yu & Zachary D. Loucks & Ian M. Harris, 2020. "Illustration of the Flexibility of Generalized Gamma Distribution in Modeling Right Censored Survival Data: Analysis of Two Cancer Datasets," Annals of Data Science, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 77-90, March.
    4. Michael Crowther & Paul Lambert, 2016. "Multistate survival analysis in Stata," United Kingdom Stata Users' Group Meetings 2016 02, Stata Users Group.
    5. I. Oostrum & T. A. Russell-Smith & M. Jakobsson & J. Torup Østby & B. Heeg, 2022. "Cost-Effectiveness of Inotuzumab Ozogamicin Compared to Standard of Care Chemotherapy for Treating Relapsed or Refractory Acute Lymphoblastic Leukaemia Patients in Norway and Sweden," PharmacoEconomics - Open, Springer, vol. 6(1), pages 47-62, January.
    6. Caitlin Eichten & Qiufei Ma & Thomas E. Delea & May Hagiwara & Roberto Ramos & Şerban R. Iorga & Jie Zhang & Richard T. Maziarz, 2021. "Lifetime Costs for Treated Follicular Lymphoma Patients in the US," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 39(10), pages 1163-1183, October.
    7. Gabrielle Jongeneel & Marjolein J. E. Greuter & Felice N. Erning & Miriam Koopman & Jan P. Medema & Raju Kandimalla & Ajay Goel & Luis Bujanda & Gerrit A. Meijer & Remond J. A. Fijneman & Martijn G. H, 2020. "Modeling Personalized Adjuvant TreaTment in EaRly stage coloN cancer (PATTERN)," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 21(7), pages 1059-1073, September.
    8. Linh Hoang Khanh Dang & Carlo Giovanni Camarda & France Meslé & Nadine Ouellette & Jean-Marie Robine & Jacques Vallin, 2023. "The question of the human mortality plateau: Contrasting insights by longevity pioneers," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 48(11), pages 321-338.
    9. María del Mar Rueda & Sergio Martínez-Puertas & Luis Castro-Martín, 2022. "Methods to Counter Self-Selection Bias in Estimations of the Distribution Function and Quantiles," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(24), pages 1-19, December.
    10. Camarda, Carlo Giovanni, 2022. "The curse of the plateau. Measuring confidence in human mortality estimates at extreme ages," Theoretical Population Biology, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 24-36.
    11. Christopher A. Büsch & Marietta Kirchner & Rouven Behnisch & Meinhard Kieser, 2024. "A Comparison of Additional Benefit Assessment Methods for Time-to-Event Endpoints Using Hazard Ratio Point Estimates or Confidence Interval Limits by Means of a Simulation Study," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 44(4), pages 365-379, May.
    12. Carmen María Yago & Francisco Javier Díez, 2023. "DESnets: A Graphical Representation for Discrete Event Simulation and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-24, March.
    13. Philip Cooney & Arthur White, 2023. "Direct Incorporation of Expert Opinion into Parametric Survival Models to Inform Survival Extrapolation," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 43(3), pages 325-336, April.
    14. Burger, Rulof & Ito, Seiro, 2016. "Labour market turnovers among South African youths," IDE Discussion Papers 603, Institute of Developing Economies, Japan External Trade Organization(JETRO).
    15. Daniel Gallacher & Peter Kimani & Nigel Stallard, 2021. "Extrapolating Parametric Survival Models in Health Technology Assessment Using Model Averaging: A Simulation Study," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 41(4), pages 476-484, May.
    16. Fuino, Michel & Wagner, Joël, 2020. "Duration of long-term care: Socio-economic factors, type of care interactions and evolution," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 151-168.
    17. Lauren Scott & Chris Rogers, 2016. "Creating summary tables using the sumtable command," United Kingdom Stata Users' Group Meetings 2016 05, Stata Users Group.
    18. Machado, Robson J.M. & van den Hout, Ardo & Marra, Giampiero, 2021. "Penalised maximum likelihood estimation in multi-state models for interval-censored data," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    19. Francesco Grossetti & Francesca Ieva & Anna Maria Paganoni, 2018. "A multi-state approach to patients affected by chronic heart failure," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 281-291, June.
    20. Michał Narajewski & Florian Ziel, 2019. "Estimation and Simulation of the Transaction Arrival Process in Intraday Electricity Markets," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-16, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:41:y:2021:i:2:p:179-193. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.