A new perspective on loss to follow‐up in failure time and life history studies

Selection processes, transportability, and failure time analysis in life history studies

In life history analysis of data from cohort studies, it is important to address the process by which participants are identified and selected. Many health studies select or enrol individuals based on whether they have experienced certain health related events, for example, disease diagnosis or some complication from disease. Standard methods of analysis rely on assumptions concerning the independence of selection and a person's prospective life history process, given their prior history. Violations of such assumptions are common, however, and can bias estimation of process features. This has implications for the internal and external validity of cohort studies, and for the transportabilty of results to a population. In this paper, we study failure time analysis by proposing a joint model for the cohort selection process and the failure process of interest. This allows us to address both independence assumptions and the transportability of study results. It is shown that transportability cannot be guaranteed in the absence of auxiliary information on the population. Conditions that produce dependent selection and types of auxiliary data are discussed and illustrated in numerical studies. The proposed framework is applied to a study of the risk of psoriatic arthritis in persons with psoriasis.

Estimands in clinical trials of complex disease processes

Clinical trials with random assignment of treatment provide evidence about causal effects of an experimental treatment compared to standard care. However, when disease processes involve multiple types of possibly semi-competing events, specification of target estimands and causal inferences can be challenging. Intercurrent events such as study withdrawal, the introduction of rescue medication, and death further complicate matters. There has been much discussion about these issues in recent years, but guidance remains ambiguous. Some recommended approaches are formulated in terms of hypothetical settings that have little bearing in the real world. We discuss issues in formulating estimands, beginning with intercurrent events in the context of a linear model and then move on to more complex disease history processes amenable to multistate modeling. We elucidate the meaning of estimands implicit in some recommended approaches for dealing with intercurrent events and highlight the disconnect between estimands formulated in terms of potential outcomes and the real world.

Statistical and Scientific Considerations Concerning the Interpretation, Replicability, and Transportability of Research Findings

To advance scientific understanding of disease processes and related intervention effects, study results should be free from bias and replicable. More broadly, investigators seek results that are transportable, that is, applicable to a perceived study population as well as in other environments and populations. We review fundamental statistical issues that arise in the analysis of observational data from disease cohorts and other sources and discuss how these issues affect the transportability and replicability of research results. Much of the literature focuses on estimating average exposure or intervention effects at the population level, but we argue for more nuanced analyses of conditional effects that reflect the complexity of disease processes.

Semiparametric recurrent event vs time-to-first-event analyses in randomized trials: Estimands and model misspecification

Insights regarding the merits of recurrent event and time-to-first-event analyses are needed to provide guidance on strategies for analyzing intervention effects in randomized trials involving recurrent event responses. Using established asymptotic results we introduce a framework for studying the large sample properties of estimators arising from semiparametric proportional rate function models and Cox regression under model misspecification. The asymptotic biases and power implications are investigated for different data generating models, and we study the impact of dependent censoring on these findings. Illustrative applications are given involving data from a cystic fibrosis trial and a carcinogenicity experiment, following which we summarize findings and discuss implications for clinical trial design.

Survival analysis for AdVerse events with VarYing follow-up times (SAVVY): Rationale and statistical concept of a meta-analytic study

The assessment of safety is an important aspect of the evaluation of new therapies in clinical trials, with analyses of adverse events being an essential part of this. Standard methods for the analysis of adverse events such as the incidence proportion, that is the number of patients with a specific adverse event out of all patients in the treatment groups, do not account for both varying follow-up times and competing risks. Alternative approaches such as the Aalen-Johansen estimator of the cumulative incidence function have been suggested. Theoretical arguments and numerical evaluations support the application of these more advanced methodology, but as yet there is to our knowledge only insufficient empirical evidence whether these methods would lead to different conclusions in safety evaluations. The Survival analysis for AdVerse events with VarYing follow-up times (SAVVY) project strives to close this gap in evidence by conducting a meta-analytical study to assess the impact of the methodology on the conclusion of the safety assessment empirically. Here we present the rationale and statistical concept of the empirical study conducted as part of the SAVVY project. The statistical methods are presented in unified notation, and examples of their implementation in R and SAS are provided.