Please discuss the following concepts brought up 1) the statement "... a possible statistical cure, in that patients may be able to live long enough .with disease to die of other causes" - This...

1 answer below »

Please discuss the following concepts brought up


1) the statement "... a possible statistical cure, in that patients may be able to live long enough .with disease to die of other causes" - This concept is sometimes described as a competing risk - meaning that in a Survival analysis model we are interested in looking for a particular event (i.e. death by breast cancer) but a different event (i.e. death by heart disease) may occur first. Discuss what implications this type of situation may have on being able to perform a survival analysis and being able to interpret the results


2) The authors discuss the concept of turning a fatal disease into a chronic disease - from a patient's perspective discuss the Pros and Cons of having this occur for a disease such as MBC.




Metastatic breast cancer survival improvement restricted by regional disparity: Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results and institutional analysis: 1990 to 2011 390 Cancer January 15, 2020 Original Article Metastatic Breast Cancer Survival Improvement Restricted by Regional Disparity: Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results and Institutional Analysis: 1990 to 2011 Judith A. Malmgren, PhD 1,2; Gregory S. Calip, PharmD, MPH, PhD 3; Mary K. Atwood, CTR4; Musa Mayer, MS, MFA5; and Henry G. Kaplan, MD4 BACKGROUND: The extent of breast cancer outcome disparity can be measured by comparing Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) by region and with institutional cohort (IC) rates. METHODS: Patients who were diagnosed with a first primary, de novo, stage IV breast cancer at ages 25 to 84 years from 1990 to 2011 were studied. The change in 5-year BCSS over time from 1990 to 2011 was compared using the SEER 9 registries (SEER 9) without the Seattle-Puget Sound (S-PS) region (n = 12,121), the S-PS region alone (n = 1931), and the S-PS region IC (n = 261). The IC BCSS endpoint was breast cancer death con- firmed from chart and/or death certificate and cause-specific survival for SEER registries. BCSS was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Hazard ratios (HzR) were calculated using Cox proportional-hazards models. RESULTS: For SEER 9 without the S-PS region, 5-year BCSS improved 7% (from 19% to 26%) over time, it improved 14% for the S-PS region (21% to 35%), and it improved 27% for the S-PS IC (29% to 56%). In the IC Cox proportional-hazards model, recent diagnosis year, chemotherapy, surgery, and age <70 years were="" associated="" with="" better="" survival.="" for="" seer="" 9,="" additional="" significant="" factors="" were="" white="" race="" and="" positive="" hormone="" receptor="" status="" and="" s-ps="" region="" was="" associated="" with="" better="" survival="" (hzr,="" 0.87;="" 95%="" ci,="" 0.84-0.90).="" in="" an="" adjusted="" model,="" hazard="" of="" bc="" death="" decreased="" in="" the="" most="" recent="" time="" period="" (2005-2011)="" by="" 28%="" in="" seer="" 9="" without="" s-ps,="" 43%="" in="" the="" s-ps="" region="" and="" 45%="" in="" the="" ic="" (hzr,="" 0.72="" [95%="" ci,="" 0.67-0.76],="" 0.57="" [95%="" ci,="" 0.49-0.66],="" and="" 0.55="" [95%="" ci,="" 0.39-0.78],="" respectively).="" conclusions:="" over="" 2="" decades,="" the="" survival="" of="" patients="" with="" metastatic="" breast="" cancer="" improved="" nationally,="" but="" with="" regional="" survival="" disparity="" and="" differential="" improvement.="" to="" achieve="" equitable="" outcomes,="" access="" and="" treatment="" approaches="" will="" need="" to="" be="" identified="" and="" adopted.="" cancer="" 2020;126:390-399.="" ©="" 2019="" the="" authors.="" cancer="" published="" by="" wiley="" periodicals,="" inc.="" on="" behalf="" of="" american="" cancer="" society.="" this="" is="" an="" open="" access="" article="" under="" the="" terms="" of="" the="" creative="" commons="" attribution-noncommercial-noderivs="" license,="" which="" permits="" use="" and="" distribution="" in="" any="" medium,="" provided="" the="" original="" work="" is="" properly="" cited,="" the="" use="" is="" non-commercial="" and="" no="" modifications="" or="" adaptations="" are="" made.="" keywords:="" differential="" survival,="" disease-specific="" survival="" (dss),="" metastatic="" breast="" cancer,="" regional="" disparity.="" introduction="" variation="" in="" breast="" cancer="" recurrence="" and="" survival="" may="" be="" influenced="" by="" age,="" race,="" access="" to="" care,="" insurance="" coverage,="" socioeconomic="" status,="" geographic="" area="" of="" residence="" (urban/rural="" or="" metropolitan/nonmetropolitan),="" and="" timely="" diagnosis="" and="" treatment.1-4="" from="" national="" statistics,="" factors="" contributing="" to="" state="" variations="" in="" cancer="" incidence="" rates="" include="" risk="" factor="" prevalence,="" access="" to="" and="" utilization="" of="" early="" detection="" services,="" and="" completeness="" of="" reporting.5="" despite="" survival="" improvements="" across="" poverty="" levels="" for="" all="" stages="" of="" disease,="" relative="" survival="" remains="" lower="" among="" women="" residing="" in="" poor="" areas="" compared="" with="" affluent="" women.6="" some="" evidence="" links="" guideline="" compliance="" to="" improved="" and="" optimal="" outcomes,="" but="" a="" lack="" of="" ability="" to="" compare="" guideline="" adherence="" in="" national="" databases="" inhibits="" the="" ability="" to="" evaluate="" widespread="" adherence="" or="" efficacy.7,8="" we="" previously="" observed="" significant="" improvement="" in="" 5-year="" disease-specific="" survival="" of="" patients="" with="" de="" novo="" stage="" iv="" metastatic="" breast="" cancer="" (mbc)="" over="" time="" from="" 1990="" to="" 2010="" without="" a="" concurrent="" improvement="" in="" the="" survival="" of="" pa-="" tients="" with="" recurrent="" mbc="" from="" our="" study="" of="" an="" institutional="" cohort="" of="" breast="" cancer="" registry="" patients.9="" the="" 5-year="" breast="" cancer-specific="" survival="" (bcss)="" rates="" in="" our="" institutional="" cohort="" of="" patients="" with="" stage="" iv="" breast="" cancer="" were="" significantly="" higher="" than="" the="" rates="" previously="" reported="" for="" stage="" iv="" breast="" cancer="" from="" surveillance,="" epidemiology,="" and="" end="" results="" (seer)="" registry="" data.10="" regional="" disparity="" in="" breast="" cancer="" outcomes="" can="" be="" measured="" by="" comparing="" bcss="" rates="" from="" seer="" across="" geo-="" graphic="" regions="" and="" with="" the="" rates="" from="" a="" seer-embedded="" institutional="" cohort.="" we="" compared="" seer="" aggregate="" data="" to="" corresponding="" author:="" judith="" a.="" malmgren,="" phd,="" 12025="" ninth="" avenue="" nw,="" seattle,="" wa="" 98177;="" [email protected]="" 1="" healthstat="" consulting,="" inc.,="" seattle,="" washington;="" 2="" department="" of="" epidemiology, university="" of="" washington,="" seattle,="" washington;="" 3="" center="" for="" pharmacoepidemiology="" and="" pharmacoeconomic="" research, university="" of="" illinois="" at="" chicago,="" chicago,="" illinois;="" 4="" swedish="" cancer="" institute,="" seattle,="" washington;="" 5="" metastatic="" breast="" cancer="" alliance,="" new="" york,="" new="" york="" we="" acknowledge="" and="" sincerely="" thank="" dr.="" marc="" hurlbert="" for="" his="" invaluable="" assistance.="" doi:="" 10.1002/cncr.32531,="" received:="" may="" 10,="" 2019;="" revised:="" august="" 25,="" 2019;="" accepted:="" august="" 30,="" 2019,="" published="" online="" october="" 22,="" 2019="" in="" wiley="" online="" library="" (wileyonlinelibrary.com)="" mailto:="" https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6939-8828="" https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7744-3518="" http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/="" mailto:[email protected]="" metastatic="" breast="" cancer="" survival="" disparity/malmgren="" et="" al="" 391cancer="" january="" 15,="" 2020="" the="" regional="" subset="" from="" the="" seattle-puget="" sound="" (s-ps)="" area="" registry="" and="" to="" an="" institutional="" cohort="" (ic)="" located="" in="" the="" s-ps="" registry="" area="" whose="" cases="" are="" included="" in="" the="" s-ps="" cancer="" surveillance="" system="" (seer="" 9="" without="" s-ps,="" n="12,121;" s-ps,="" n="1931;" and="" seattle="" ic,="" n="261)." our="" objectives="" were="" to="" compare="" survival="" rates="" to="" evaluate="" regional="" disparity="" in="" de="" novo="" mbc="" survival,="" to="" compare="" survival="" rate="" improvement="" over="" time="" by="" region="" and="" insti-="" tution,="" and="" to="" assess="" the="" impact="" of="" temporal="" advances="" in="" systemic="" therapies="" on="" trends="" in="" de="" novo="" stage="" iv="" mbc="" survival="" rates.="" in="" particular,="" our="" focus="" was="" on="" regional="" survival="" differences="" and="" the="" potential="" for="" survival="" rate="" improvement="" over="" time="" as="" patients="" with="" metastatic="" disease="" have="" a="" poor="" prognosis="" and="" are="" often="" treated="" with="" palliative="" rather="" than="" with="" stabilizing="" or="" curative="" intent.="" materials="" and="" methods="" the="" analysis="" included="" patients="" aged="" 25="" to="" 84="" years="" with="" first="" primary="" breast="" cancer="" who="" were="" diagnosed="" with="" de="" novo="" stage="" iv="" breast="" cancer="" from="" 1990="" to="" 2011="" in="" the="" seer="" 9="" registries="" and="" an="" institutional="" cohort="" (ic)="" located="" in="" the="" seer="" 9="" s-ps="" region="" (vital="" status="" through="" 2016).="" we="" calculated="" 5="" -year="" breast="" cancer-specific="" sur-="" vival="" (bcss)="" for="" 3="" time="" periods="" (1990-1998,="" 1999-2004,="" and="" 2005-2011),="" during="" which="" adjuvant="" chemotherapy="" treatments="" changed="" significantly="" and="" was="" available="" for="" the="" ic="" patients="" (table="" 1).11="" for="" the="" ic,="" the="" bcss="" end-="" point="" was="" breast="" cancer="" death="" confirmed="" from="" chart="" and/="" or="" death="" certificate.="" for="" seer,="" seer*stat-documented="" cause-specific="" survival="" was="" used.12="" the="" seer="" s-ps="" region="" was="" used="" separately="" for="" comparison="" with="" seer="" 9="" without="" s-ps="" and="" the="" ic.="" five-year="" bcss="" and="" 95%="" cis="" and="" cox="" proportional="" hazard="" models="" were="" calculated="" using="" spss="" 25.0="" (ibm="" corporation)="" for="" the="" institutional="" cohort="" and="" stata="" (statacorp="" llc)="" for="" seer="" 9.13,14="" bcss="" was="" estimated="" as="" the="" net="" measure="" representing="" survival="" from="" death="" caused="" by="" the="" primary="" diagnosed="" breast="" cancer="" in="" the="" absence="" of="" other="" causes="" of="" death.="" patients="" who="" died="" of="" causes="" other="" than="" those="" specified="" were="" considered="" to="" be="" censored.15="" cox="" proportional="" hazards="" modelling="" was="" used="" to="" es-="" timate="" adjusted="" hazard="" ratios="" (hzr)="" with="" corresponding="" 95%="" cis,="" with="" death="" from="" disease="" as="" the="" endpoint.="" the="" ic="" was="" used="" to="" build="" an="" a="" priori="" model="" informed="" by="" a="" chi-square="" analysis="" and="" tested="" by="" stepwise="" entry="" into="" the="" model="" with="" a="" subsequent="" forced-entry="" model="" to="" include="" all="" variables="" of="" interest="" in="" the="" seer="" 9="" population.="" the="" proportional="" hazards="" assumption="" was="" evaluated="" graph-="" ically="" using="" the="" log(-log[survival])="" versus="" log="" of="" survival="" time.="" we="" found="" no="" evidence="" suggesting="" violation="" of="" the="" proportionality="" assumption.="" all="" p="" values="" were="" 2-sided="" using="" a="" .05="" level="" of="" significance.="" data="" from="" the="" seer="" 9="" population-based="" cancer="" registries="" (connecticut,="" detroit,="" atlanta,="" san="" francisco-="" oakland,="" hawaii,="" iowa,="" new="" mexico,="" seattle-puget="" sound,="" and="" utah)="" were="" included="" in="" our="" analysis.16="" the="" seer="" pro-="" gram="" is="" funded="" by="" the="" national="" institutes="" of="" health="" and="" the="" national="" cancer="" institute="" and="" represents="" cancer="" incidence="" data="" for="" approximately="" 28%="" of="" the="" us="" population.="" the="" institutional="" cohort="" (ic)="" breast="" cancer="" registry="" database,="" which="" was="" created="" in="" 1990,="" contains="" detailed="" information="" on="" diagnosis,="" pathology,="" staging,="" surgery,="" chemotherapy,="" radiation="" therapy,="" tumor="" markers,="" and="" vital="" status="" at="" follow-up,="" including="" cause-specific="" death.="" incident="" breast="" cancer="" cases="" are="" entered="" at="" the="" time="" of="" diag-="" nosis="" in="" a="" health="" insurance="" portability="" and="" accountability="" act="" of="" 1996="" (hipaa)-compliant="" and="" institutional="" review="" board="" (irb)-approved="" research="" registry.="" this="" project="" was="" hipaa="" compliant="" and="" irb="" approved.="" patient="" vital="" and="" disease="" status,="" including="" date,="" site="" and="" type="" of="" recurrence,="" and="" date="" and="" cause="" of="" death,="" is="" collected="" prospectively="" through="" annual="" updates="" by="" a="" certified="" cancer="" registrar.="" follow-up="" is="" obtained="" from:="" 1)="" electronic="" chart="" review;="" 2)="" an="" irb-approved,="" physician-directed="" follow-up="" letter;="" 3)="" an="" institutional="" cancer="" registry;="" and="" 4)="" the="" seer="" s-ps="" registry.17="" table="" 1.="" change="" in="" systemic="" therapy="" from="" 1990="" to="" 2011:="" stage="" iv="" breast="" cancer,="" ic="" patients="" only, n =" 261" systemic="" therapy="" no.="" of="" patients="" (%)="" p1990-1998="" 1999-2004="" 2005-2011="" initial="" chemotherapy,="" n =" 175" 51="" (64)="" 40="" (66)="" 84="" (70)="" .629="" taxane="" therapy,="" n =" 99" 11="" (21)="" 24="" (60)="" 64="" (76)=""><.001 anthracycline="" therapy,="" n =" 114" 43="" (83)="" 28="" (70)="" 43="" (51)="" .001="" trastuzumab="" therapy:="" her-2–positive="" patients,="" n =" 45" 0="" (0)="" 8="" (68)="" 25="" (100)=""><.001 neoadjuvant therapy, n = 64 18 (23) 7 (12) 39 (33) .007 hormone therapy: hr-positive patients, n = 193 48 (86) 41 (89) 83 (91) .583 abbreviation: hr, hormone receptor. original article 392 cancer january 15, 2020 results the seer 9 without s-ps population and the seer s-ps region population were both older than the ic patients (mean age, 61 vs 55 years). more ic and s-ps patients identified as white race (ic, 81%; s-ps, 89%) than seer 9 without s-ps patients (75%) (table 2). of all invasive breast cancers in the populations, 5% of those in seer 9 without s-ps, 4% of those in the s-ps region, and 3% of those in the ic were de novo stage iv. patients in the s-ps region and in the ic were more often hormone recep- tor (hr)-positive (66% and 74%, respectively, vs 56% in seer 9 without s-ps). stage iv surgical treatment was received by ≥50% of patients in all 3 groups (seer 9 without s-ps, 58%; s-ps, 56%; ic, 50%). patients in the neoadjuvant="" therapy,="" n =" 64" 18="" (23)="" 7="" (12)="" 39="" (33)="" .007="" hormone="" therapy:="" hr-positive="" patients,="" n =" 193" 48="" (86)="" 41="" (89)="" 83="" (91)="" .583="" abbreviation:="" hr,="" hormone="" receptor.="" original="" article="" 392="" cancer="" january="" 15,="" 2020="" results="" the="" seer="" 9="" without="" s-ps="" population="" and="" the="" seer="" s-ps="" region="" population="" were="" both="" older="" than="" the="" ic="" patients="" (mean="" age,="" 61="" vs="" 55="" years).="" more="" ic="" and="" s-ps="" patients="" identified="" as="" white="" race="" (ic,="" 81%;="" s-ps,="" 89%)="" than="" seer="" 9="" without="" s-ps="" patients="" (75%)="" (table="" 2).="" of="" all="" invasive="" breast="" cancers="" in="" the="" populations,="" 5%="" of="" those="" in="" seer="" 9="" without="" s-ps,="" 4%="" of="" those="" in="" the="" s-ps="" region,="" and="" 3%="" of="" those="" in="" the="" ic="" were="" de="" novo="" stage="" iv.="" patients="" in="" the="" s-ps="" region="" and="" in="" the="" ic="" were="" more="" often="" hormone="" recep-="" tor="" (hr)-positive="" (66%="" and="" 74%,="" respectively,="" vs="" 56%="" in="" seer="" 9="" without="" s-ps).="" stage="" iv="" surgical="" treatment="" was="" received="" by="" ≥50%="" of="" patients="" in="" all="" 3="" groups="" (seer="" 9="" without="" s-ps,="" 58%;="" s-ps,="" 56%;="" ic,="" 50%).="" patients="" in="">
Answered 1 days AfterMar 24, 2021

Answer To: Please discuss the following concepts brought up 1) the statement "... a possible statistical cure,...

Malvika answered on Mar 26 2021
133 Votes
1
Concept Discussion
Conceptual Discussion
Survival Analysis Model and Competing Risk
    Survival analysis is the concept that helps in the analysis of the expected duration of time in sync with the oc
currence of one or more events, which may include the death of the biological organisms or the failure of the mechanical systems. Austin (2017) highlighted in his work that the multilevel survival analysis can be useful in analysing the risks that different elements have comparatively. However, there are risks associated with the application of survival analysis, which is referred to as competing risks (Emmert-Streib & Dehmer, 2019). In the work by Zhang (2017) it is mentioned that survival analysis in the presence of competing risks is challenging for the clinical investigators and affects their ability to link the causes of death in the right manner. It also hinders the ability of the clinical investigators to observe the event. For instance, the competing risk of dialysis is a kidney transplant that disturbs the cycle of observation of events. Sapir-Pichhadze et al. (2016) suggested in their study that the competing risks have the potential of altering the probability of the occurrence of the event and is therefore a disturbing factor in the proper application of the survival analysis model.
Figure 1: Survival Analysis with competing risk
    In figure 1 it is highlighted that the survival analysis of the individuals with affected kidney over two years is based on the dialysis sessions and the availability of a kidney for the transplant. In the initial years where the possibility of getting a kidney for transplant is low, the percentage of dependence on dialysis is high but with an increased chance of getting a kidney for the transplant there is an interruption on the dialysis cycle and the patient’s dependence on it is decreased. The outcome is the inability of the clinical investigators to be able to analyse the impact of dialysis and the support it can provide in extending the life of the...
SOLUTION.PDF

Answer To This Question Is Available To Download

Related Questions & Answers

More Questions »

Submit New Assignment

Copy and Paste Your Assignment Here