Bias of the additive hazard model in the presence of causal effect heterogeneity

IF 1.2 3区 数学 Q3 MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS
Richard A. J. Post, Edwin R. van den Heuvel, Hein Putter
{"title":"Bias of the additive hazard model in the presence of causal effect heterogeneity","authors":"Richard A. J. Post, Edwin R. van den Heuvel, Hein Putter","doi":"10.1007/s10985-024-09616-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Hazard ratios are prone to selection bias, compromising their use as causal estimands. On the other hand, if Aalen’s additive hazard model applies, the hazard difference has been shown to remain unaffected by the selection of frailty factors over time. Then, in the absence of confounding, observed hazard differences are equal in expectation to the causal hazard differences. However, in the presence of effect (on the hazard) heterogeneity, the observed hazard difference is also affected by selection of survivors. In this work, we formalize how the observed hazard difference (from a randomized controlled trial) evolves by selecting favourable levels of effect modifiers in the exposed group and thus deviates from the causal effect of interest. Such selection may result in a non-linear integrated hazard difference curve even when the individual causal effects are time-invariant. Therefore, a homogeneous time-varying causal additive effect on the hazard cannot be distinguished from a time-invariant but heterogeneous causal effect. We illustrate this causal issue by studying the effect of chemotherapy on the survival time of patients suffering from carcinoma of the oropharynx using data from a clinical trial. The hazard difference can thus not be used as an appropriate measure of the causal effect without making untestable assumptions.</p>","PeriodicalId":49908,"journal":{"name":"Lifetime Data Analysis","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Lifetime Data Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"100","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10985-024-09616-z","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"数学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Hazard ratios are prone to selection bias, compromising their use as causal estimands. On the other hand, if Aalen’s additive hazard model applies, the hazard difference has been shown to remain unaffected by the selection of frailty factors over time. Then, in the absence of confounding, observed hazard differences are equal in expectation to the causal hazard differences. However, in the presence of effect (on the hazard) heterogeneity, the observed hazard difference is also affected by selection of survivors. In this work, we formalize how the observed hazard difference (from a randomized controlled trial) evolves by selecting favourable levels of effect modifiers in the exposed group and thus deviates from the causal effect of interest. Such selection may result in a non-linear integrated hazard difference curve even when the individual causal effects are time-invariant. Therefore, a homogeneous time-varying causal additive effect on the hazard cannot be distinguished from a time-invariant but heterogeneous causal effect. We illustrate this causal issue by studying the effect of chemotherapy on the survival time of patients suffering from carcinoma of the oropharynx using data from a clinical trial. The hazard difference can thus not be used as an appropriate measure of the causal effect without making untestable assumptions.

Abstract Image

因果效应异质性情况下加法危险模型的偏差
危险比容易产生选择偏差,从而影响其作为因果关系估算值的使用。另一方面,如果采用 Aalen 的加性危险模型,则危险差异不受随时间变化的虚弱因素选择的影响。那么,在没有混杂因素的情况下,观察到的危险度差异与因果危险度差异的期望值相等。然而,在存在效应(对危险的影响)异质性的情况下,观察到的危险差异也会受到幸存者选择的影响。在这项工作中,我们正式阐述了观察到的危害差异(来自随机对照试验)是如何通过在暴露组中选择有利的效应调节因子水平而发生变化,从而偏离感兴趣的因果效应的。即使单个因果效应是时间不变的,这种选择也可能导致非线性综合危害差异曲线。因此,对危害的同质时变因果叠加效应无法与时变但异质的因果效应区分开来。我们利用临床试验数据研究化疗对口咽癌患者生存时间的影响,以此来说明这一因果问题。因此,如果不做出无法检验的假设,危险差异就不能作为衡量因果效应的适当指标。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Lifetime Data Analysis
Lifetime Data Analysis 数学-数学跨学科应用
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
7.70%
发文量
43
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The objective of Lifetime Data Analysis is to advance and promote statistical science in the various applied fields that deal with lifetime data, including: Actuarial Science – Economics – Engineering Sciences – Environmental Sciences – Management Science – Medicine – Operations Research – Public Health – Social and Behavioral Sciences.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信