Thorough validation is pivotal for any prediction model before it can be advocated for use in medical practice. For time-to-event outcomes such as breast cancer recurrence, death from other causes is a competing risk. Model performance measures must account for such competing events. In this article, we present a comprehensive yet accessible overview of performance measures for this competing event setting, including the calculation and interpretation of statistical measures for calibration, discrimination, overall prediction error, and clinical usefulness by decision curve analysis. All methods are illustrated for patients with breast cancer, with publicly available data and R code.

Not available.

Multi-state models provide an extension of the usual survival/event-history analysis setting. In the medical domain, multi-state models give the possibility of further investigating intermediate events such as relapse and remission. In this work, a further extension is proposed using relative survival, where mortality due to population causes (i.e. non-disease-related mortality) is evaluated. The objective is to split all mortality in disease and non-disease-related mortality, with and without intermediate events, in datasets where cause of death is not recorded or is uncertain. To this end, population mortality tables are integrated into the estimation process, while using the basic relative survival idea that the overall mortality hazard can be written as a sum of a population and an excess part. Hence, we propose an upgraded non-parametric approach to estimation, where population mortality is taken into account. Precise definitions and suitable estimators are given for both the transition hazards and probabilities. Variance estimating techniques and confidence intervals are introduced and the behaviour of the new method is investigated through simulations. The newly developed methodology is illustrated by the analysis of a cohort of patients followed after an allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. The work has been implemented in the R package mstate.

In studies analyzing competing time-to-event outcomes, interest often lies in both estimating the effects of baseline covariates on the cause-specific hazards and predicting cumulative incidence functions. When missing values occur in these baseline covariates, they may be discarded as part of a complete-case analysis or multiply imputed. In the latter case, the imputations may be performed either compatibly with a substantive model pre-specified as a cause-specific Cox model [substantive model compatible fully conditional specification (SMC-FCS)], or approximately so [multivariate imputation by chained equations (MICE)]. In a large simulation study, we assessed the performance of these three different methods in terms of estimating cause-specific regression coefficients and predicting cumulative incidence functions. Concerning regression coefficients, results provide further support for use of SMC-FCS over MICE, particularly when covariate effects are large and the baseline hazards of the competing events are substantially different. Complete-case analysis also shows adequate performance in settings where missingness is not outcome dependent. With regard to cumulative incidence prediction, SMC-FCS and MICE are performed more similarly, as also evidenced in the illustrative analysis of competing outcomes following a hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. The findings are discussed alongside recommendations for practising statisticians.

No abstract