103 research outputs found
Analysis of time-to-event for observational studies: Guidance to the use of intensity models
This paper provides guidance for researchers with some mathematical
background on the conduct of time-to-event analysis in observational studies
based on intensity (hazard) models. Discussions of basic concepts like time
axis, event definition and censoring are given. Hazard models are introduced,
with special emphasis on the Cox proportional hazards regression model. We
provide check lists that may be useful both when fitting the model and
assessing its goodness of fit and when interpreting the results. Special
attention is paid to how to avoid problems with immortal time bias by
introducing time-dependent covariates. We discuss prediction based on hazard
models and difficulties when attempting to draw proper causal conclusions from
such models. Finally, we present a series of examples where the methods and
check lists are exemplified. Computational details and implementation using the
freely available R software are documented in Supplementary Material. The paper
was prepared as part of the STRATOS initiative.Comment: 28 pages, 12 figures. For associated Supplementary material, see
http://publicifsv.sund.ku.dk/~pka/STRATOSTG8
A reference relative time-scale as an alternative to chronological age for cohorts with long follow-up
Background: Epidemiologists have debated the appropriate time-scale for cohort survival studies; chronological age or time-on-study being two such time-scales. Importantly, assessment of risk factors may depend on the choice of time-scale. Recently, chronological or attained age has gained support but a case can be made for a ‘reference relative time-scale’ as an alternative which circumvents difficulties that arise with this and other scales. The reference relative time of an individual participant is the integral of a reference population hazard function between time of entry and time of exit of the individual. The objective here is to describe the reference relative time-scale, illustrate its use, make comparison with attained age by simulation and explain its relationship to modern and traditional epidemiologic methods.
Results: A comparison was made between two models; a stratified Cox model with age as the time-scale versus an un-stratified Cox model using the reference relative time-scale. The illustrative comparison used a UK cohort of cotton workers, with differing ages at entry to the study, with accrual over a time period and with long follow-up. Additionally, exponential and Weibull models were fitted since the reference relative time-scale analysis need not be restricted to the Cox model. A simulation study showed that analysis using the reference relative time-scale and analysis using chronological age had very similar power to detect a significant risk factor and both were equally unbiased. Further, the analysis using the reference relative time-scale supported fully-parametric survival modelling and allowed percentile predictions and mortality curves to be constructed.
Conclusions: The reference relative time-scale was a viable alternative to chronological age, led to simplification of the modelling process and possessed the defined features of a good time-scale as defined in reliability theory. The reference relative time-scale has several interpretations and provides a unifying concept that links contemporary approaches in survival and reliability analysis to the traditional epidemiologic methods of Poisson regression and standardised mortality ratios. The community of practitioners has not previously made this connection
Light smoking at base-line predicts a higher mortality risk to women than to men; evidence from a cohort with long follow-up
BACKGROUND: There is conflicting evidence as to whether smoking is more harmful to women than to men. The UK Cotton Workers’ Cohort was recruited in the 1960s and contained a high proportion of men and women smokers who were well matched in terms of age, job and length of time in job. The cohort has been followed up for 42 years. METHODS: Mortality in the cohort was analysed using an individual relative survival method and Cox regression. Whether smoking, ascertained at baseline in the 1960s, was more hazardous to women than to men was examined by estimating the relative risk ratio women to men, smokers to never smoked, for light (1–14), medium (15–24), heavy (25+ cigarettes per day) and former smoking. RESULTS: For all-cause mortality relative risk ratios were 1.35 for light smoking at baseline (95% CI 1.07-1.70), 1.15 for medium smoking (95% CI 0.89-1.49) and 1.00 for heavy smoking (95% CI 0.63-1.61). Relative risk ratios for light smoking at baseline for circulatory system disease was 1.42 (95% CI 1.01 to 1.98) and for respiratory disease was 1.89 (95% CI 0.99 to 3.63). Heights of participants provided no explanation for the gender difference. CONCLUSIONS: Light smoking at baseline was shown to be significantly more hazardous to women than to men but the effect decreased as consumption increased indicating a dose response relationship. Heavy smoking was equally hazardous to both genders. This result may help explain the conflicting evidence seen elsewhere. However gender differences in smoking cessation may provide an alternative explanation
Is Cancer survival associated with cancer symptom awareness and barriers to seeking medical help in England? An ecological study
Abstract
BACKGROUND:
Campaigns aimed at raising cancer awareness and encouraging early presentation have been implemented in England. However, little is known about whether people with low cancer awareness and increased barriers to seeking medical help have worse cancer survival, and whether there is a geographical variation in cancer awareness and barriers in England.
METHODS:
From population-based surveys (n=35?308), using the Cancer Research UK Cancer Awareness Measure, we calculated the age- and sex-standardised symptom awareness and barriers scores for 52 primary care trusts (PCTs). These measures were evaluated in relation to the sex-, age-, and type of cancer-standardised cancer survival index of the corresponding PCT, from the National Cancer Registry, using linear regression. Breast, lung, and bowel cancer survival were analysed separately.
RESULTS:
Cancer symptom awareness and barriers scores varied greatly between geographical regions in England, with the worst scores observed in socioeconomically deprived parts of East London. Low cancer awareness score was associated with poor cancer survival at PCT level (estimated slope=1.56, 95% CI: 0.56; 2.57). The barriers score was not associated with overall cancer survival, but it was associated with breast cancer survival (estimated slope=-0.66, 95% CI: -1.20; -0.11). Specific barriers, such as embarrassment and difficulties in arranging transport to the doctor's surgery, were associated with worse breast cancer survival.
CONCLUSIONS:
Cancer symptom awareness and cancer survival are associated. Campaigns should focus on improving awareness about cancer symptoms, especially in socioeconomically deprived areas. Efforts should be made to alleviate barriers to seeking medical help in women with symptoms of breast cancer.British Journal of Cancer advance online publication 18 August 2016; doi:10.1038/bjc.2016.246 www.bjcancer.com
Patient, tumor, and healthcare factors associated with regional variability in lung cancer survival: a Spanish high‑resolution population‑based study
Purpose
The third most frequently diagnosed cancer in Europe in 2018 was lung cancer; it is also the leading cause of cancer death in Europe. We studied patient and tumor characteristics, and patterns of healthcare provision explaining regional variability in lung cancer survival in southern Spain.
Methods
A population-based cohort study included all 1196 incident first invasive primary lung cancer (C33–C34 according to ICD-10) cases diagnosed between 2010 and 2011 with follow-up until April 2015. Data were drawn from local population-based cancer registries and patients’ hospital medical records from all public and private hospitals from two regions in southern Spain.
Results
There was evidence of regional differences in lung cancer late diagnosis (58% stage IV in Granada vs. 65% in Huelva, p value < 0.001). Among patients with stage I, only 67% received surgery compared with 0.6% of patients with stage IV. Patients treated with a combination of radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and surgery had a 2-year mortality risk reduction of 94% compared with patients who did not receive any treatment (excess mortality risk 0.06; 95% CI 0.02–0.16). Geographical differences in survival were observed between the two regions: 35% vs. 26% at 1-year since diagnosis.
Conclusions
The observed geographic differences in survival between regions are due in part to the late cancer diagnosis which determines the use of less effective therapeutic options. Results from our study justify the need for promoting lung cancer early detection strategies and the harmonization of the best practice in lung cancer management and treatment.Maria Jose Sanchez Perez is supported by the Andalusian Department of Health: Research, Development, and Innovation Office project grant PI-0152/2017. Miguel Angel Luque-Fernandez is supported by the Spanish National Institute of Health, Carlos III Miguel Servet I Investigator Award (CP17/00206)
No inequalities in survival from colorectal cancer by education and socioeconomic deprivation - a population-based study in the North Region of Portugal, 2000-2002
Early mobilization in the critical care unit: A review of adult and pediatric literature.
Early mobilization of critically ill patients is beneficial, suggesting that it should be incorporated into daily clinical practice. Early passive, active, and combined progressive mobilizations can be safely initiated in intensive care units (ICUs). Adult patients receiving early mobilization have fewer ventilator-dependent days, shorter ICU and hospital stays, and better functional outcomes. Pediatric ICU data are limited, but recent studies also suggest that early mobilization is achievable without increasing patient risk. In this review, we provide a current and comprehensive appraisal of ICU mobilization techniques in both adult and pediatric critically ill patients. Contraindications and perceived barriers to early mobilization, including cost and health care provider views, are identified. Methods of overcoming barriers to early mobilization and enhancing sustainability of mobilization programs are discussed. Optimization of patient outcomes will require further studies on mobilization timing and intensity, particularly within specific ICU populations
Accuracy of cause of death data routinely recorded in a population-based cancer registry: impact on cause-specific survival and validation using the Geneva Cancer Registry.
BACKGROUND: Information on the underlying cause of death of cancer patients is of interest because it can be used to estimate net survival. The population-based Geneva Cancer Registry is unique because registrars are able to review the official cause of death. This study aims to describe the difference between the official and revised cause-of-death variables and the impact on cancer survival estimates. METHODS: The recording process for each cause of death variable is summarised. We describe the differences between the two cause-of-death variables for the 5,065 deceased patients out of the 10,534 women diagnosed with breast cancer between 1970 and 2009. The Kappa statistic and logistic regression are applied to evaluate the degree of concordance. The impact of discordance on cause-specific survival is examined using the Kaplan Meier method. RESULTS: The overall agreement between the two variables was high. However, several subgroups presented a lower concordance, suggesting differences in calendar time and less attention given to older patients and more advanced diseases. Similarly, the impact of discordance on cause-specific survival was small on overall survival but larger for several subgroups. CONCLUSION: Estimation of cancer-specific survival could therefore be prone to bias when using the official cause of death. Breast cancer is not the more lethal cancer and our results can certainly not be generalised to more lethal tumours
- …