Survival Analysis: find marginal CDF from marginal hazard rates?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on deriving the marginal cumulative distribution function (CDF) from marginal hazard rates in the context of independent competing risks. The formula provided by the professor is F_j(t) = ∫₀ᵗ exp{-∑₁ᴶ ∫₀ᵘ λ_j(v) dv} λ_j(u) du, where λ_j(t) represents cause-specific hazard rates. The user attempts to compute F_1(t) but identifies that F_1(∞) ≠ 1, indicating a potential error in their calculations. The discussion also highlights the importance of correctly formatting LaTeX commands for clarity in mathematical expressions.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of survival analysis concepts, particularly competing risks.
  • Familiarity with LaTeX formatting for mathematical expressions.
  • Knowledge of hazard functions and their role in survival analysis.
  • Basic calculus skills for evaluating integrals.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of independent competing risks in survival analysis.
  • Learn how to properly format LaTeX commands for mathematical clarity.
  • Explore the derivation of marginal CDFs from hazard rates in survival models.
  • Investigate the implications of unequal treatment group sizes on survival probabilities.
USEFUL FOR

Statisticians, data analysts, and researchers in biostatistics or epidemiology who are working with survival analysis and competing risks models will benefit from this discussion.

NewNameStat
Messages
1
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Qhvsy.png


Homework Equations



My professor gives us the following formula: [ tex ] F_j(t) = \int\limits_0^t exp\Big\{-\sum\limits_{j=1}^J \int\limits_0^u \lambda_j^{\#}(v)dv \Big\} \lambda_j^{\#}(u)du[ / tex ] where [ tex ]\lambda_j^{\#}(t) [ / tex ] are the cause-specific hazard rates for cause $j$.

The Attempt at a Solution



Assuming we have independent competing risks (we have not yet talked about dependent competing risks so I think it's safe to assume this), $\tilde{F}_j(t) = \int\limits_0^t exp\Big\{-\sum\limits_{j=1}^J \int\limits_0^u \tilde{\lambda}_j(v)dv \Big\} \tilde{\lambda}_j(u)du$ where $\tilde{\lambda}_j(u)$ is the marginal hazard rate for cause $j$.

So, $\tilde{F}_1(t) = \int\limits_0^t exp\Big\{- \int\limits_0^u 1 dv - \int\limits_0^u .5\sqrt{v} \; dv \Big\} .5\sqrt{u} \; du = .5\int\limits_0^t exp\Big\{- u - \frac{1}{3}u^{3/2}\; dv \Big\} \sqrt{u}\;du$.

However, I do not think this is right because $\tilde{F}_1(\infty)\neq 1$ (it equals something around $0.25$).

 
Physics news on Phys.org
NewNameStat said:

Homework Statement



Qhvsy.png


Homework Equations



My professor gives us the following formula: [ tex ] F_j(t) = \int\limits_0^t exp\Big\{-\sum\limits_{j=1}^J \int\limits_0^u \lambda_j^{\#}(v)dv \Big\} \lambda_j^{\#}(u)du[ / tex ] where [ tex ]\lambda_j^{\#}(t) [ / tex ] are the cause-specific hazard rates for cause $j$.

The Attempt at a Solution



Assuming we have independent competing risks (we have not yet talked about dependent competing risks so I think it's safe to assume this), $\tilde{F}_j(t) = \int\limits_0^t exp\Big\{-\sum\limits_{j=1}^J \int\limits_0^u \tilde{\lambda}_j(v)dv \Big\} \tilde{\lambda}_j(u)du$ where $\tilde{\lambda}_j(u)$ is the marginal hazard rate for cause $j$.

So, $\tilde{F}_1(t) = \int\limits_0^t exp\Big\{- \int\limits_0^u 1 dv - \int\limits_0^u .5\sqrt{v} \; dv \Big\} .5\sqrt{u} \; du = .5\int\limits_0^t exp\Big\{- u - \frac{1}{3}u^{3/2}\; dv \Big\} \sqrt{u}\;du$.

However, I do not think this is right because $\tilde{F}_1(\infty)\neq 1$ (it equals something around $0.25$).

I have re-formatted your tex commands, to make them work properly. You should:
(1) remove the spaces in "[ tex ]" and " [ / tex ]", writing "[tex]" and "[/tex]" (but all in lower-case letters); and
(2) use "\exp" instead of "exp".
Also: removing the superscript # from the lambdas would make it look better; those superscripts serve no useful purpose. Just writing ##\lambda_j## is good enough. However, I did not do that, since what you wrote is not incorrect---just unnecessary.

[tex]F_j(t) = \int\limits_0^t \exp\Big\{-\sum\limits_{j=1}^J \int\limits_0^u \lambda_j^{\#}(v)dv \Big\} \lambda_j^{\#}(u)du[/tex]

Finally: I do not understand the above formula. If, say, there were 1000 patients involved and each treatment involved 500 patients, the probability that a randomly-chosen patient falls in class 1 or class 2 is 1/2, giving F1 as a mixture:
[tex]F_1(t) = \frac{1}{2} F_{11}(t)+\frac{1}{2} F_{12}(t).[/tex]
However, if unequal numbers got treatments 1 and 2, such as 400 receiving treatment 1 and 600 receiving treatment 2, we should have
[tex]F_1(t) = \frac{4}{10} F_{11}(t) + \frac{6}{10} F_{12}(t).[/tex]
Here, ##F_{11}## uses ##\lambda_1 = \sqrt{t}## and ##F_{12}## uses ##\lambda_2 = 0.5\sqrt{t}##.

I did not even attempt to read your analysis, since the tex commands are not working; please edit and re-submit.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
17K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
6K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 175 ·
6
Replies
175
Views
28K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K