Cited by 211Statistical Distribution Estimation and ApplicationsStatistical Methods and Bayesian InferenceStatistical Methods and Inference

Joint frailty models for recurring events and death using maximum penalized likelihood estimation: application on cancer events

Open access
Rondeau, V., Mathoulin-Pelissier, S., Jacqmin-Gadda, H., Brouste, V., Soubeyran, P.·2006·Biostatistics

Abstract

The observation of repeated events for subjects in cohort studies could be terminated by loss to follow-up, end of study, or a major failure event such as death. In this context, the major failure event could be correlated with recurrent events, and the usual assumption of noninformative censoring of the recurrent event process by death, required by most statistical analyses, can be violated. Recently, joint modeling for 2 survival processes has received considerable attention because it makes it possible to study the joint evolution over time of 2 processes and gives unbiased and efficient parameters. The most commonly used estimation procedure in the joint models for survival events is the expectation maximization algorithm. We show how maximum penalized likelihood estimation can be applied to nonparametric estimation of the continuous hazard functions in a general joint frailty model with right censoring and delayed entry. The simulation study demonstrates that this semiparametric approach yields satisfactory results in this complex setting. As an illustration, such an approach is applied to a prospective cohort with recurrent events of follicular lymphomas, jointly modeled with death.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/biostatistics/kxl043

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • To account for informative censoring due to cardiovascular death, the hazard ratio for total nonfatal events was calculated using a joint frailty model.

    “In addition, to account for informative censoring due to cardiovascular death, we calculated the hazard ratio for total nonfatal events using a joint frailty model (52).”

    From Effects of Icosapent Ethyl on Total Ischemic Events (2019) · cites this paper as [52]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rondeau, V., Mathoulin-Pelissier, S., Jacqmin-Gadda, H., Brouste, V., & Soubeyran, P.
Affiliations
  • Inserm (FR)
  • Institut Bergonié (FR)
Corresponding author
Rondeau, V.
Venue
Biostatistics
Published
2006-12-06
Volume
8
Issue
4
Pages
708-721
ISSN
  • 1465-4644 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-4357
OpenAlex
W2121046269
Cited by
211
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 28 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 9
FWCI
2.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
other-oa
Locations
  • Biostatistics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Distribution Estimation and Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Inference
Keywords
joint frailty model, recurrent events, death, right censoring, delayed entry, follicular lymphoma, loss to follow-up
MeSH terms
Biometry, Humans, Lymphoma, Follicular, Models, Biological, Neoplasms, Recurrence, Models, Statistical, Likelihood Functions

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review