Gene selection for survival data under dependent censoring: a copula-based approach

Emura, Takeshi and Chen, Yi-Hau (2014): Gene selection for survival data under dependent censoring: a copula-based approach. Published in: Statistical Methods in Medical Research

Abstract

Dependent censoring arises in biomedical studies when the survival outcome of interest is censored by competing risks. In survival data with microarray gene expressions, gene selection based on the univariate Cox regression analyses has been used extensively in medical research, which however, is only valid under the independent censoring assumption. In this paper, we first consider a copula-based framework to investigate the bias caused by dependent censoring on gene selection. Then, we utilize the copula-based dependence model to develop an alternative gene selection procedure. Simulations show that the proposed procedure adjusts for the effect of dependent censoring and thus outperforms the existing method when dependent censoring is indeed present. The non-small-cell lung cancer data is analyzed to demonstrate the usefulness of our proposal. We implemented the proposed method in an R “compound.Cox” package.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: Bivariate survival distribution; Competing risk; Compound covariate prediction; Cox regression; Cross validation; Frailty, Kendall’s tau
• Subjects: C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C1 - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General > C12 - Hypothesis Testing: General; C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C1 - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General > C13 - Estimation: General; C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C1 - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General > C14 - Semiparametric and Nonparametric Methods: General; C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C3 - Multiple or Simultaneous Equation Models ; Multiple Variables > C34 - Truncated and Censored Models ; Switching Regression Models

References

1 Cox DR. Regression models and life-tables (with discussion), Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B 1972; 34: 187-220.

2 Jenssen TK, Kuo WP, Stokke T, Hovig E. Association between gene expressions in breast cancer and patient survival. Human Genetics 2002; 111: 411-20.

3 Matsui S. Predicting survival outcomes using subsets of significant genes in prognostic marker studies with microarrays. BMC Bioinformatics 2006; 7:156.

4 Chen HY, Yu SL, Chen CH, Chang GC, Chen CY, Yuan A, Cheng CL, Wang CH, Terng HJ, Kao SF, et al. A five-gene signature and clinical outcome in non-small-cell lung cancer. The New England Journal of Medicine 2007; 356: 11-20.

5 Matsui S, Simon R, Qu P, Shaughnessy JD Jr, Barlogie B, Crowley J. Developing and validating continuous genomic signatures in randomized clinical trials for predictive medicine. Clinical Cancer Research 2012; 18: (21).

6 Tukey JW. Tightening the clinical trial. Controlled Clinical Trials 1993; 14: 266-285.

7 Radamacher MD, Mcshane LM, Simon R. A paradigm for class prediction using gene expression profiles. Journal of Computational Biology 2002; 9:505-511.

8 Beer DG, Kardia SLR, Huang CC, Giordano TJ, Levin AM, Misek DE, Lin L, Chen C, Charib TG, Thomas DG, et al. Gene-expression profiles predict survival of patients with lung adenocarcinoma. Nature Medicine 2002; 8: 816-24.

9 Emura T, Chen YH, Chen HY. Survival prediction based on compound covariate under Cox proportional hazard models. PLoS ONE 2012; 7(10): e47627. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0047627.

10 Beyersmann J, Allignol A, Schumacher M. Competing risks and multistate models with R. Springer-Verlag, New York; 2012.

11 Fine JP, Gray RJ. A proportional hazards model for the subdistribution of a competing risk. J. Am. Statist. Assoc. 1999; 94: 548-560.

12 Binder H, Allignol A, Schumacher M, Beyersmann J. Boosting for high-dimensional time-to-event data with competing risks. Bioinformatics 2009; 25: 890-896.

13 Bakoyannis G, Touloumi G. Practical methods for competing risks data: a review. Statistical Method in Medical Research 2012; 21: 257-272.

14 Mogensen UB, Gerds TA. A random forest approach for competing risks based on pseudo-values. Statistics in Medicine 2011; 32: 3102-3114.

15 Nelsen RB. An Introduction to Copulas, 2nd Edition. Springer Series in Statistics, Springer-Verlag, New York; 2006.

16 Zheng M, Klein JP. Estimates of marginal survival for dependent competing risks based on an assumed copula. Biometrika 1995; 82: 127-138.

17 Heckman JJ, Honore BE. (1989). The identifiability of the competing risks models. Biometrika 1989; 76: 325-330.

18 Rivest LP, Wells MT. A martingale approach to the copula-graphic estimator for the survival function under dependent censoring. J. of Mult. Anal. 2001; 79: 138-55.

19 Chen YH. Semiparametric marginal regression analysis for dependent competing risks under an assumed copula, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Ser. B 2010; 72: 235-51.

20 Wessels LFA, Reinders MJT, Hart AAM, Veenman CJ, Dai H, He YD, van’t Veer LJ. A protocol for building and evaluating predictors of disease state based on microarray data. Bioinformatics 2002; 21: 3755-62.

21 Witten DM, Tibshirani R. Survival analysis with high-dimensional covariates. Statistical Method in Medical Research 2010; 19: 29-51.

22 Andersen PK, Borgan O, Gill RD, Keiding N. Statistical Models Based on Counting Processes, New York: Springer-Verlag; 1993.

23 Fleming TR, Harrington DP. Counting Process and Survival Analysis. New York: John Wiley and Sons; 1991.

24 Struthers CA, Kalbfleish JD. (1986). Misspecified proportional hazard models, Biometrika 1986; 73: 363-69.

25 Oakes D. Bivariate survival models induced by frailties. J. Am. Statist. Assoc. 1989; 84: 487-93.

26 Kalbfleisch JD, Prentice RL. The Statistical Analysis of Failure Time Data, 2nd Edition, New York: John Wiley and Sons; 2002.

27 Escarela G, Carriere JF. Fitting competing risks with an assumed copula. Statistical Method in Medical Research 2003; 12: 333-349.

28 Braekers R, Veraverbeke N. A copula-graphic estimator for the conditional survival function under dependent censoring. The Canadian Journal of Statistics 2005; 33: 429-447.

29 Emura T, Chen YH. Regression estimation based on the compound shrinkage method under the Cox proportional hazard model, R compound.Cox package, version 1.4. 2014.

30 Tsiatis A. A nonidentifiability aspect of the problem of competing risks. Proc. Natn. Acad. Sci. USA 1975; 72: 20-22.

31 Verveij PJM, van Houwelingen HC. Cross validation in survival analysis. Statistics in Medicine 1993; 12: 2305-2314.

32 Harrell FE, Califf RM, Pryor DB, Lee KL, Rosati RA. Evaluating the yield of medical tests. Journal of the American Medical Association 1982; 247: 2543-46.

33 Harrell FE, Lee KL, Mark DB. Multivariate prognostic models: issues in developing models, evaluating assumptions and adequacy, and measuring and reducing errors. Statistics in Medicine 1996; 15: 361-87.

34 Pepe MS, Fleming TR. Weighted Kaplan-Meier statistics: a class of distance tests for censored survival data. Biometrics 1989; 45: 497-507.

35 Frankel PH, Reid ME, Marshall JR. A permutation test for a weighted Kaplan-Meier estimator with application to the nutritional prevention of cancer trial. Contemporary Clinical Trial 2007; 28: 343-347.