Affiliation:
1. 1Department of Epidemiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
2. 2Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
3. 3Division of Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
4. 4Division of Intramural Research, National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities, NIH, Bethesda, Maryland.
Abstract
Abstract
Background:
Studies evaluating the effects of cancer treatments are prone to immortal time bias that, if unaddressed, can lead to treatments appearing more beneficial than they are.
Methods:
To demonstrate the impact of immortal time bias, we compared results across several analytic approaches (dichotomous exposure, dichotomous exposure excluding immortal time, time-varying exposure, landmark analysis, clone-censor-weight method), using surgical resection among women with metastatic breast cancer as an example. All adult women diagnosed with incident metastatic breast cancer from 2013–2016 in the National Cancer Database were included. To quantify immortal time bias, we also conducted a simulation study where the “true” relationship between surgical resection and mortality was known.
Results:
24,329 women (median age 61, IQR 51–71) were included, and 24% underwent surgical resection. The largest association between resection and mortality was observed when using a dichotomized exposure [HR, 0.54; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.51–0.57], followed by dichotomous with exclusion of immortal time (HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.59–0.65). Results from the time-varying exposure, landmark, and clone-censor-weight method analyses were closer to the null (HR, 0.67–0.84). Results from the plasmode simulation found that the time-varying exposure, landmark, and clone-censor-weight method models all produced unbiased HRs (bias −0.003 to 0.016). Both standard dichotomous exposure (HR, 0.84; bias, −0.177) and dichotomous with exclusion of immortal time (HR, 0.93; bias, −0.074) produced meaningfully biased estimates.
Conclusions:
Researchers should use time-varying exposures with a treatment assessment window or the clone-censor-weight method when immortal time is present.
Impact:
Using methods that appropriately account for immortal time will improve evidence and decision-making from research using real-world data.
Funder
National Institute of Nursing Research
National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities
Publisher
American Association for Cancer Research (AACR)
Cited by
10 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献