CAST, 2024-11-18

Background Question

  • Do you wonder why we have so many special cases in statistics that require seemingly different methods?
    • time to first event
    • recurrent events
    • recurrent events with an absorbing state
    • cure models (two absorbing states)
    • competing risks

Background, continued

  • More special cases
    • Wilcoxon, Kruskal-Wallis, logrank tests
    • zero inflation adaptations of Poisson and negative binomial models
    • longitudinal data analysis

Semiparametric Regression

Univariate Proportional Odds Model

  • \(\Pr(Y \geq y | X) = \mathrm{expit}(\alpha_{y} + X\beta)\)
  • \(Y\)-transformation invariant, does not use \(Y\) spacings
  • Handles arbitrarily heavy ties or continuous \(Y\), bi-modality, …
  • Direct competitor of the linear model

Longitudinal Models

Full Likelihood Extensions

  • Random intercepts
    • massive lack of fit for correlation structure
      • implies there is interest in individual pt-level outcomes vs. group level (treatment level)
      • absorbing states destroy the correlation pattern
      • typically assumes that > 6 observations per patient do not increase power

Full Likelihood Extensions, continued

  • Random intercepts and slopes
    • more flexible correlation structure but still may not fit
      • too many parameters to estimate
    • can’t have absorbing states
  • Markov models
    • most flexible, fastest, easiest to program
      • trivial to implement with ML (until you want state occupancy probabilities)

Full Likelihood Extensions, continued

  • Markov models apply to all \(Y\)
    • binary
    • unordered categorical
    • ordinal categorical
    • ordinal continuous
    • ordinal mixed continuous and categorical
    • continuous
    • left, right, and interval censored
    • require unconditioning on previous \(Y\) to get marginal distributions

First-Order Discrete Time Markov Proportional Odds Model

  • Current state depends only on covariates, previous state
  • Let measurement times be \(t_{1}, t_{2}, \dots, t_{m}\), and the measurement for a patient at time \(t\) be denoted \(Y(t)\) \[\Pr(Y(t_{i}) \geq y | X, Y(t_{i-1})) =\] \[\mathrm{expit}(\alpha_{y} + X\beta + g(Y(t_{i-1}), t_{i}))\]

Unifying Approach

Markov PO Model: A Unified Approach

  • Time to terminating event
    • transition probability = discrete hazard rate
    • OR \(\approx\) HR when time intervals small
    • easily handles time-dependent covariates, left-truncation
  • Recurrent binary events
  • Recurrent binary events + a terminal event

Unified Approach, continued

  • Competing risks
    • death explicitly handled as a bad outcome
    • easier to interpret than competing risk models
  • Serial current status data
    • events of different severities
    • no need to judge whether an early heart attack is worse than a late death
  • Missing data and interval-censored \(Y\)

Unified Approach, continued

  • Standard longitudinal continuous \(Y\)
  • Longitudinal continuous or ordinal \(Y\) interrupted by clinical events
  • Easily handles multiple absorbing states
  • Serial correlation: condition on previous outcome
  • Random intercepts (compound symmetry correlation): condition on average of all previous outcomes

Examples of Longitudinal Ordinal Outcomes

  • 0=alive 1=dead
    • censored at 3w: 000
    • death at 2w: 01
  • 0=at home 1=hospitalized 2=MI 3=dead
    • hospitalized at 3w, rehosp at 7w, MI at 8w & stays in hosp, f/u ends at 10w: 0010001211

Examples, continued

  • 0-6 QOL excellent–poor, 7=MI 8=stroke 9=dead
    • QOL varies, not assessed in 3w but pt event free, stroke at 8w, death 9w: 12[0-6]334589
    • MI status unknown at 7w: 12[0-6]334[5,7]89
  • Can make first 200 levels be a continuous response variable and the remaining values represent clinical event overrides

From Transition Probabilities to State Occupancy Probabilities

Unconditioning on Previous States

  • For equal time spacing:
    \(\Pr(Y(t)=y | X) =\)
    \(\sum_{j=1}^{k}\Pr(Y(t)=y | X, Y(t-1) = j) \times\)
    \(\Pr(Y(t-1) = j | X)\)
  • Use this recursively
  • Yields a semiparametric unconditional (except for \(X\)) distribution of \(Y\) at each \(t\) (SOPs)
  • soprobMarkovOrd* functions in the R Hmisc package make this easy for frequentist and Bayesian models

Estimands

  • Transition odds ratios (original parameters)
  • Prior state and covariate-specific transition probabilities
  • State occupancy probabilities (SOPs; marginalize over time)
  • Covariate-specific SOPs
    • \(\Pr(\)stroke in week 4 or death in or before week 4\()\); \(\Pr(\)stroke and alive\()\)

Estimands, continued

  • Time in state \(Y=y\) (like RMST)
  • Time in states \(Y \geq y\) (e.g., mean time unwell)
  • Differences in mean time in state between treatments
  • Continuous \(Y\) example: mean time with SBP < 130mmHg
    • Nice way to handle treatment \(\times\) time interaction
    • No categorization of SBP

More Information

Bayesian transition models for ordinal longitudinal outcomes

MD Rohde, B French, TG Stewart, FE Harrell Jr.
Statistics in Medicine 2024-06-09
DOI: 10.1002/sim.10133

See also fharrell.com/talk/cmstat