×

zbMATH — the first resource for mathematics

Does Cox analysis of a randomized survival study yield a causal treatment effect? (English) Zbl 1333.62228
Summary: Statistical methods for survival analysis play a central role in the assessment of treatment effects in randomized clinical trials in cardiovascular disease, cancer, and many other fields. The most common approach to analysis involves fitting a Cox regression model including a treatment indicator, and basing inference on the large sample properties of the regression coefficient estimator. Despite the fact that treatment assignment is randomized, the hazard ratio is not a quantity which admits a causal interpretation in the case of unmodelled heterogeneity. This problem arises because the risk sets beyond the first event time are comprised of the subset of individuals who have not previously failed. The balance in the distribution of potential confounders between treatment arms is lost by this implicit conditioning, whether or not censoring is present. Thus while the Cox model may be used as a basis for valid tests of the null hypotheses of no treatment effect if robust variance estimates are used, modeling frameworks more compatible with causal reasoning may be preferrable in general for estimation.

MSC:
62N01 Censored data models
Software:
invGauss
PDF BibTeX Cite
Full Text: DOI
References:
[1] Aalen, OO, A linear regression model for the analysis of life times, Stat Med, 8, 907-925, (1989)
[2] Aalen OO, Borgan Ø, Gjessing HK (2008) Survival and event history analysis: a process point of view. Springer, New York · Zbl 1204.62165
[3] Aalen OO, Røysland K, Gran JM, Kouyos R, Lange T (2014) Can we believe the DAGs? A comment on the relationship between causal DAGs and mechanisms. Stat Methods Med Res. doi:10.1177/0962280213520436 · Zbl 0753.62076
[4] Brown, BM; Wang, Y-G, Standard errors and covariance matrices for smoothed rank estimators, Biometrika, 92, 149-158, (2005) · Zbl 1068.62037
[5] Cheng, SC; Wei, LJ; Ying, Z, Analysis of transformation models with censored data, Biometrika, 82, 835-845, (1995) · Zbl 0861.62071
[6] Cox, DR, Survival models and life tables (with discussion), J R Stat Soc, 34, 187-220, (1972) · Zbl 0243.62041
[7] Cox DR, Oakes D (1984) Anal Surviv Data. Chapman & Hall/CRC, Boca Raton
[8] Durham, LK; Halloran, ME; Longini, IM; Manatunga, AK, Comparison of two smoothing methods for exploring waning vaccine effects, J R Stat Soc, 48, 395-407, (1999) · Zbl 0939.62111
[9] Flanders, WD; Klein, M, Properties of 2 counterfactual effect definitions of a point exposure, Epidemiology, 18, 453-460, (2007)
[10] Ford, I; Norrie, J; Ahmadi, S, Model inconsistency, illustrated by the Cox proportional hazards model, Stat Med, 14, 735-746, (1995)
[11] Gould, A; Lawless, JF, Consistency and efficiency of regression coefficient estimates in location-scale models, Biometrika, 75, 535-540, (1988) · Zbl 0654.62052
[12] Greenland, S, Absence of confounding does not correspond to collapsibility of the rate ratio or rate difference, Epidemiology, 7, 498-501, (1996)
[13] Hauck, WW; Anderson, S; Marcus, SM, Should we adjust for covariates in nonlinear regression analyses of randomized trials?, Controlled Clin Trials, 19, 249-256, (1998)
[14] Hernán, MA, The hazards of hazard ratios, Epidemiology, 21, 13-15, (2010)
[15] Hernán MA, Robins JM (2015) Causal inference. Chapman & Hall/CRC, Boca Raton
[16] Hernán, MA; Hernández-Díaz, S; Robins, JM, A structural approach to selection bias, Epidemiology, 15, 615-625, (2004)
[17] Kalbfleisch JD, Prentice RL (2002) The statistical analysis of failure time data, 2nd edn. Wiley, Hoboken · Zbl 1012.62104
[18] Kaplan, EL; Meier, P, Nonparametric estimation from incomplete observation, J Am Stat Assoc, 53, 457-481, (1958) · Zbl 0089.14801
[19] Lawless JF (2003) Statistical models and methods for lifetime data, 2nd edn. Wiley, Hoboken · Zbl 1015.62093
[20] Lin, DY; Wei, LJ, The robust inference for the Cox proportional hazards model, J Am Stat Assoc, 84, 1074-1078, (1989) · Zbl 0702.62042
[21] Lin, H; Li, Y; Jiang, L; Li, G, A semiparametric linear transformation model to estimate causal effects for survival data, Can J Stat, 42, 18-35, (2014) · Zbl 1349.62134
[22] Martinussen, T; Vansteelandt, S, On collapsibility and confounding bias in Cox and aalen regression models, Lifetime Data Anal, 19, 279-296, (2013) · Zbl 1322.62253
[23] Pearl J (2009) Causality: models, reasoning, and inference, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge · Zbl 1188.68291
[24] Robins, J, Estimation of the time-dependent accelerated failure time model in the presence of confounding factors, Biometrika, 79, 321-334, (1992) · Zbl 0753.62076
[25] Strohmaier S, Røysland K, Hoff R, Borgan Ø, Pedersen T, Aalen OO (2014) Dynamic path analysis—a useful tool to investigate mediation processes in clinical survival trials. Submitted · Zbl 0861.62071
[26] Struthers, CA; Kalbfleisch, JD, Misspecified proportional hazards models, Biometrika, 74, 363-369, (1986) · Zbl 0606.62108
[27] Wei, LJ, The accelerated failure time model: a useful alternative to the Cox regression model in survival analysis, Stat Med, 11, 1871-1879, (1992)
[28] Yusuf, S; Wittes, J; Probstfield, J; Tyroler, HA, Analysis and interpretation of treatment effects in subgroups of patients in randomized clinical trials, J Am Med Assoc, 266, 93-98, (1991)
This reference list is based on information provided by the publisher or from digital mathematics libraries. Its items are heuristically matched to zbMATH identifiers and may contain data conversion errors. It attempts to reflect the references listed in the original paper as accurately as possible without claiming the completeness or perfect precision of the matching.