Cargando…

Comparing current and emerging practice models for the extrapolation of survival data: a simulation study and case-study

BACKGROUND: Estimates of future survival can be a key evidence source when deciding if a medical treatment should be funded. Current practice is to use standard parametric models for generating extrapolations. Several emerging, more flexible, survival models are available which can provide improved...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kearns, Benjamin, Stevenson, Matt D., Triantafyllopoulos, Kostas, Manca, Andrea
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8627632/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34837957
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-021-01460-1
_version_ 1784606873061687296
author Kearns, Benjamin
Stevenson, Matt D.
Triantafyllopoulos, Kostas
Manca, Andrea
author_facet Kearns, Benjamin
Stevenson, Matt D.
Triantafyllopoulos, Kostas
Manca, Andrea
author_sort Kearns, Benjamin
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Estimates of future survival can be a key evidence source when deciding if a medical treatment should be funded. Current practice is to use standard parametric models for generating extrapolations. Several emerging, more flexible, survival models are available which can provide improved within-sample fit. This study aimed to assess if these emerging practice models also provided improved extrapolations. METHODS: Both a simulation study and a case-study were used to assess the goodness of fit of five classes of survival model. These were: current practice models, Royston Parmar models (RPMs), Fractional polynomials (FPs), Generalised additive models (GAMs), and Dynamic survival models (DSMs). The simulation study used a mixture-Weibull model as the data-generating mechanism with varying lengths of follow-up and sample sizes. The case-study was long-term follow-up of a prostate cancer trial. For both studies, models were fit to an early data-cut of the data, and extrapolations compared to the known long-term follow-up. RESULTS: The emerging practice models provided better within-sample fit than current practice models. For data-rich simulation scenarios (large sample sizes or long follow-up), the GAMs and DSMs provided improved extrapolations compared with current practice. Extrapolations from FPs were always very poor whilst those from RPMs were similar to current practice. With short follow-up all the models struggled to provide useful extrapolations. In the case-study all the models provided very similar estimates, but extrapolations were all poor as no model was able to capture a turning-point during the extrapolated period. CONCLUSIONS: Good within-sample fit does not guarantee good extrapolation performance. Both GAMs and DSMs may be considered as candidate extrapolation models in addition to current practice. Further research into when these flexible models are most useful, and the role of external evidence to improve extrapolations is required. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12874-021-01460-1.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8627632
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-86276322021-11-30 Comparing current and emerging practice models for the extrapolation of survival data: a simulation study and case-study Kearns, Benjamin Stevenson, Matt D. Triantafyllopoulos, Kostas Manca, Andrea BMC Med Res Methodol Research BACKGROUND: Estimates of future survival can be a key evidence source when deciding if a medical treatment should be funded. Current practice is to use standard parametric models for generating extrapolations. Several emerging, more flexible, survival models are available which can provide improved within-sample fit. This study aimed to assess if these emerging practice models also provided improved extrapolations. METHODS: Both a simulation study and a case-study were used to assess the goodness of fit of five classes of survival model. These were: current practice models, Royston Parmar models (RPMs), Fractional polynomials (FPs), Generalised additive models (GAMs), and Dynamic survival models (DSMs). The simulation study used a mixture-Weibull model as the data-generating mechanism with varying lengths of follow-up and sample sizes. The case-study was long-term follow-up of a prostate cancer trial. For both studies, models were fit to an early data-cut of the data, and extrapolations compared to the known long-term follow-up. RESULTS: The emerging practice models provided better within-sample fit than current practice models. For data-rich simulation scenarios (large sample sizes or long follow-up), the GAMs and DSMs provided improved extrapolations compared with current practice. Extrapolations from FPs were always very poor whilst those from RPMs were similar to current practice. With short follow-up all the models struggled to provide useful extrapolations. In the case-study all the models provided very similar estimates, but extrapolations were all poor as no model was able to capture a turning-point during the extrapolated period. CONCLUSIONS: Good within-sample fit does not guarantee good extrapolation performance. Both GAMs and DSMs may be considered as candidate extrapolation models in addition to current practice. Further research into when these flexible models are most useful, and the role of external evidence to improve extrapolations is required. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12874-021-01460-1. BioMed Central 2021-11-27 /pmc/articles/PMC8627632/ /pubmed/34837957 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-021-01460-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Kearns, Benjamin
Stevenson, Matt D.
Triantafyllopoulos, Kostas
Manca, Andrea
Comparing current and emerging practice models for the extrapolation of survival data: a simulation study and case-study
title Comparing current and emerging practice models for the extrapolation of survival data: a simulation study and case-study
title_full Comparing current and emerging practice models for the extrapolation of survival data: a simulation study and case-study
title_fullStr Comparing current and emerging practice models for the extrapolation of survival data: a simulation study and case-study
title_full_unstemmed Comparing current and emerging practice models for the extrapolation of survival data: a simulation study and case-study
title_short Comparing current and emerging practice models for the extrapolation of survival data: a simulation study and case-study
title_sort comparing current and emerging practice models for the extrapolation of survival data: a simulation study and case-study
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8627632/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34837957
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-021-01460-1
work_keys_str_mv AT kearnsbenjamin comparingcurrentandemergingpracticemodelsfortheextrapolationofsurvivaldataasimulationstudyandcasestudy
AT stevensonmattd comparingcurrentandemergingpracticemodelsfortheextrapolationofsurvivaldataasimulationstudyandcasestudy
AT triantafyllopouloskostas comparingcurrentandemergingpracticemodelsfortheextrapolationofsurvivaldataasimulationstudyandcasestudy
AT mancaandrea comparingcurrentandemergingpracticemodelsfortheextrapolationofsurvivaldataasimulationstudyandcasestudy