Cited by 2,653Statistical Methods and InferenceProbability and Statistical ResearchStatistical Methods in Epidemiology

Introduction to the Analysis of Survival Data in the Presence of Competing Risks

Open access
Austin, Peter C., Lee, Douglas S., Fine, Jason P.·2016·Circulation

Abstract

Competing risks occur frequently in the analysis of survival data. A competing risk is an event whose occurrence precludes the occurrence of the primary event of interest. In a study examining time to death attributable to cardiovascular causes, death attributable to noncardiovascular causes is a competing risk. When estimating the crude incidence of outcomes, analysts should use the cumulative incidence function, rather than the complement of the Kaplan-Meier survival function. The use of the Kaplan-Meier survival function results in estimates of incidence that are biased upward, regardless of whether the competing events are independent of one another. When fitting regression models in the presence of competing risks, researchers can choose from 2 different families of models: modeling the effect of covariates on the cause-specific hazard of the outcome or modeling the effect of covariates on the cumulative incidence function. The former allows one to estimate the effect of the covariates on the rate of occurrence of the outcome in those subjects who are currently event free. The latter allows one to estimate the effect of covariates on the absolute risk of the outcome over time. The former family of models may be better suited for addressing etiologic questions, whereas the latter model may be better suited for estimating a patient’s clinical prognosis. We illustrate the application of these methods by examining cause-specific mortality in patients hospitalized with heart failure. Statistical software code in both R and SAS is provided.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1161/circulationaha.115.017719

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 17

  1. [1]Kalbfleisch JD Prentice RL. The Statistical Analysis of Failure Time Data 2002 2nd ed New York, NY John Wiley and Sons
  2. [5]Klein JP Moeschberger ML. Survival Analysis: Techniques for Censored and Truncated Data 1997 New York, NY Springer-Verlag
  3. [6]Lawless JF. Statistical Models and Methods for Lifetime Data 1982 New York, NY John Wiley & Sons
  4. [7]Rao SR Schoenfeld DA. Survival methods. Circulation 2007 115 109 113 doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.106.614859. 17200454 · DOI
  5. [8]Berry SD Ngo L Samelson EJ Kiel DP. Competing risk of death: an important consideration in studies of older adults. J Am Geriatr Soc 2010 58 783 787 doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2010.02767.x. 20345862 PMC2873048 · DOI
  6. [9]Lau B Cole SR Gange SJ. Competing risk regression models for epidemiologic data. Am J Epidemiol 2009 170 244 256 doi: 10.1093/aje/kwp107. 19494242 PMC2732996 · DOI
  7. [10]Putter H Fiocco M Geskus RB. Tutorial in biostatistics: competing risks and multi-state models. Stat Med 2007 26 2389 2430 doi: 10.1002/sim.2712. 17031868 · DOI
  8. [11]Satagopan JM Ben-Porat L Berwick M Robson M Kutler D Auerbach AD. A note on competing risks in survival data analysis. Br J Cancer 2004 91 1229 1235 doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6602102. 15305188 PMC2410013 · DOI
  9. [12]Varadhan R Weiss CO Segal JB Wu AW Scharfstein D Boyd C. Evaluating health outcomes in the presence of competing risks: a review of statistical methods and clinical applications. Med Care 2010 48 6 suppl S96 S105 doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e3181d99107. 20473207 · DOI
  10. [13]Pepe MS Mori M. Kaplan-Meier, marginal or conditional probability curves in summarizing competing risks failure time data? Stat Med 1993 12 737 751 8516591
  11. [15]Koller MT Raatz H Steyerberg EW Wolbers M. Competing risks and the clinical community: irrelevance or ignorance? Stat Med 2012 31 1089 1097 doi: 10.1002/sim.4384. 21953401 PMC3575691 · DOI
  12. [16]Tu JV Donovan LR Lee DS Wang JT Austin PC Alter DA Ko DT. Effectiveness of public report cards for improving the quality of cardiac care: the EFFECT study: a randomized trial. JAMA 2009 302 2330 2337 doi: 10.1001/jama.2009.1731. 19923205 · DOI
  13. [17]Latouche A Allignol A Beyersmann J Labopin M Fine JP. A competing risks analysis should report results on all cause-specific hazards and cumulative incidence functions. J Clin Epidemiol 2013 66 648 653 doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2012.09.017. 23415868 · DOI
  14. [18]Pintilie M. Competing Risks: A Practical Perspective 2006 West Sussex John Wiley & Sons Ltd
  15. [19]Szychowski JM Roth DL Clay OJ Mittelman MS. Patient death as a censoring event or competing risk event in models of nursing home placement. Stat Med 2010 29 371 381 doi: 10.1002/sim.3797. 20014354 PMC2811964 · DOI
  16. [20]Wolbers M Koller MT Witteman JC Steyerberg EW. Prognostic models with competing risks: methods and application to coronary risk prediction. Epidemiology 2009 20 555 561 doi: 10.1097/EDE.0b013e3181a39056. 19367167 · DOI
  17. [21]Wolbers M Koller MT Stel VS Schaer B Jager KJ Leffondré K Heinze G. Competing risks analyses: objectives and approaches. Eur Heart J 2014 35 2936 2941 doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehu131. 24711436 PMC4223609 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Austin, P. C., Lee, D. S., & Fine, J. P.
Affiliations
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
  • University Health Network (CA)
Corresponding author
Austin, Peter C.
Venue
Circulation
Published
2016-02-09
Volume
133
Issue
6
Pages
601-609
ISSN
  • 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4539
OpenAlex
W2264767503
Cited by
2,653
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 359 · 2025: 305 · 2024: 377 · 2023: 326 · 2022: 331 · 2021: 278 · 2020: 258 · 2019: 160 · 2018: 139 · 2017: 78 · 2016: 38 · 2014: 2
FWCI
139.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc-nd
Locations
  • Circulation (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Carolina Digital Repository (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill) (submittedVersion)
  • UNC Libraries
Funders
  • Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
  • Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences
  • Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care
  • Canadian Institutes of Health Research (86508, MOP86508)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Inference
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Probability and Statistical Research
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
Keywords
competing risks, survival analysis, cumulative incidence function, cause-specific hazard, incidence estimation, heart failure mortality, cardiovascular mortality, absolute risk, prognostic model
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Cardiovascular Diseases, Female, Humans, Male, Risk Factors, Statistics as Topic, Models, Statistical, Survival Analysis, Databases, Factual, Kaplan-Meier Estimate

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