Affiliation:
1. The First Affiliated Hospital of Jinan University
2. Henan Provincial People's Hospital, People's Hospital of Zhengzhou University
3. The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University
Abstract
Abstract
Background: The classic Cox proportional-hazards model is generally used to derive risk factors affecting patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML). However, when competing risk factors are present, the results of Cox analysis need to be revisited.Objective: This study aimed to develop a competing-risks model to assess the factors that influence predictions of patients with CML in an attempt to produce results that are more accurate than those from Cox analyses.Methods: The CML data in the SEER (Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results) database that met our requirements during 1975–2019 were analyzed. Univariate analyses in this study were performed using cumulative incidence functions and Gray’s tests, and the multivariate analysis was performed using three models: Fine-Gray, cause-specific, and Cox proportional-hazards models.Results: Of the 8331 included cases, 4827 (57.94%) died (2459 [29.52%] from CML and 2368 [28.42%] from other causes) and 3504 (42.60) survived. Gray’s test indicated that the outcome was significantly affected by year of diagnosis, age, total number of in situ/malignant tumors, type of reporting source, marital status, and primary indicator of malignancy. The results of the multivariate competing-risks analyses suggested that age, year of diagnosis, total number of in situ/malignant tumors, type of reporting source, marital status, and primary indicator of malignancy were independent risk factors for the prognosis of patients with CML (P<0.05). Conclusions: This study has developed a competing-risks analysis model for assessing the risk factors for patients with CML. Our findings may allow for more-accurate formulation of clinical decisions, saving healthcare resources in the current individualized treatment environment for the benefit of the patients.
Publisher
Research Square Platform LLC
Reference48 articles.
1. Andersen, P. K., and M. Pohar Perme. "Inference for Outcome Probabilities in Multi-State Models." [In eng]. Lifetime Data Anal 14, no. 4 (Dec 2008): 405 – 31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10985-008-9097-x.
2. Austin, C. Peter, Fine, and P. Jason. "Practical Recommendations for Reporting Fine-Gray Model Analyses for Competing Risk Data."
3. Austin, P. C., D. S. Lee, and J. P. %J Circulation Fine. "Introduction to the Analysis of Survival Data in the Presence of Competing Risks." 133, no. 6 (2016): 601.
4. Berger, M., M. Schmid, T. Welchowski, S. Schmitz-Valckenberg, and J. Beyersmann. "Subdistribution Hazard Models for Competing Risks in Discrete Time." [In eng]. Biostatistics 21, no. 3 (Jul 1 2020): 449 – 66. https://doi.org/10.1093/biostatistics/kxy069.
5. %J Journal of the American Geriatrics Society Kiel. "Competing Risk of Death: An Important Consideration in Studies of Older Adults." 58;Berry SD,2010