This tutorial provides an introduction to survival analysis, and to conducting a survival analysis in R.
This tutorial was originally presented at the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center RPresenters series on August 30, 2018.
It was then modified for a more extensive training at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in March, 2019.
Please click the GitHub icon in the header above to go to the GitHub repository for this tutorial, where all of the source code for this tutorial can be accessed in the file survival_analysis_in_r.Rmd
.
This presentation will cover some basics of survival analysis, and the following series tutorial papers can be helpful for additional reading:
Clark, T., Bradburn, M., Love, S., & Altman, D. (2003). Survival analysis part I: Basic concepts and first analyses. 232238. ISSN 00070920.
M J Bradburn, T G Clark, S B Love, & D G Altman. (2003). Survival Analysis Part II: Multivariate data analysis – an introduction to concepts and methods. British Journal of Cancer, 89(3), 431436.
Bradburn, M., Clark, T., Love, S., & Altman, D. (2003). Survival analysis Part III: Multivariate data analysis – choosing a model and assessing its adequacy and fit. 89(4), 60511.
Clark, T., Bradburn, M., Love, S., & Altman, D. (2003). Survival analysis part IV: Further concepts and methods in survival analysis. 781786. ISSN 00070920.
Some packages we’ll be using today include:
lubridate
survival
survminer
library(survival)
library(survminer)
library(lubridate)
Timetoevent data that consist of a distinct start time and end time.
Examples from cancer
Timetoevent data are common in many fields including, but not limited to
Because survival analysis is common in many other fields, it also goes by other names
The lung
dataset is available from the survival
package in R
. The data contain subjects with advanced lung cancer from the North Central Cancer Treatment Group. Some variables we will use to demonstrate methods today include
RICH JT, NEELY JG, PANIELLO RC, VOELKER CCJ, NUSSENBAUM B, WANG EW. A PRACTICAL GUIDE TO UNDERSTANDING KAPLANMEIER CURVES. Otolaryngology head and neck surgery: official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery. 2010;143(3):331336. doi:10.1016/j.otohns.2010.05.007.
A subject may be censored due to:
Specifically these are examples of right censoring.
Left censoring and interval censoring are also possible, and methods exist to analyze this type of data, but this training will be limited to right censoring.
In this example, how would we compute the proportion who are eventfree at 10 years?
Subjects 6 and 7 were eventfree at 10 years. Subjects 2, 9, and 10 had the event before 10 years. Subjects 1, 3, 4, 5, and 8 were censored before 10 years, so we don’t know whether they had the event or not by 10 years  how do we incorporate these subjects into our estimate?
For subject \(i\):
Event time \(T_i\)
Censoring time \(C_i\)
Event indicator \(\delta_i\):
Observed time \(Y_i = \min(T_i, C_i)\)
The observed times and an event indicator are provided in the lung
data
inst  time  status  age  sex  ph.ecog  ph.karno  pat.karno  meal.cal  wt.loss 

3  306  2  74  1  1  90  100  1175  NA 
3  455  2  68  1  0  90  90  1225  15 
3  1010  1  56  1  0  90  90  NA  15 
5  210  2  57  1  1  90  60  1150  11 
1  883  2  60  1  0  100  90  NA  0 
12  1022  1  74  1  1  50  80  513  0 
Data will often come with start and end dates rather than precalculated survival times. The first step is to make sure these are formatted as dates in R.
Let’s create a small example dataset with variables sx_date
for surgery date and last_fup_date
for the last followup date.
date_ex <
tibble(
sx_date = c("20070622", "20040213", "20101027"),
last_fup_date = c("20170415", "20180704", "20161031")
)
date_ex
## # A tibble: 3 x 2
## sx_date last_fup_date
## <chr> <chr>
## 1 20070622 20170415
## 2 20040213 20180704
## 3 20101027 20161031
We see these are both character variables, which will often be the case, but we need them to be formatted as dates.
date_ex %>%
mutate(
sx_date = as.Date(sx_date, format = "%Y%m%d"),
last_fup_date = as.Date(last_fup_date, format = "%Y%m%d")
)
## # A tibble: 3 x 2
## sx_date last_fup_date
## <date> <date>
## 1 20070622 20170415
## 2 20040213 20180704
## 3 20101027 20161031
R
the format must include the separator as well as the symbol. e.g. if your date is in format m/d/Y then you would need format = "%m/%d/%Y"
We can also use the lubridate
package to format dates. In this case, use the ymd
function
date_ex %>%
mutate(
sx_date = ymd(sx_date),
last_fup_date = ymd(last_fup_date)
)
## # A tibble: 3 x 2
## sx_date last_fup_date
## <date> <date>
## 1 20070622 20170415
## 2 20040213 20180704
## 3 20101027 20161031
R
option, the separators do not need to be specified?dmy
will show all format options.Now that the dates formatted, we need to calculate the difference between start and end time in some units, usually months or years. In base R
, use difftime
to calculate the number of days between our two dates and convert it to a numeric value using as.numeric
. Then convert to years by dividing by 365.25
, the average number of days in a year.
date_ex %>%
mutate(
os_yrs =
as.numeric(
difftime(last_fup_date,
sx_date,
units = "days")) / 365.25
)
## # A tibble: 3 x 3
## sx_date last_fup_date os_yrs
## <date> <date> <dbl>
## 1 20070622 20170415 9.82
## 2 20040213 20180704 14.4
## 3 20101027 20161031 6.01
Using the lubridate
package, the operator %%
designates a time interval, which is then converted to the number of elapsed seconds using as.duration
and finally converted to years by dividing by dyears(1)
, which gives the number of seconds in a year.
date_ex %>%
mutate(
os_yrs =
as.duration(sx_date %% last_fup_date) / dyears(1)
)
## # A tibble: 3 x 3
## sx_date last_fup_date os_yrs
## <date> <date> <dbl>
## 1 20070622 20170415 9.82
## 2 20040213 20180704 14.4
## 3 20101027 20161031 6.01
lubridate
package using a call to library
in order to be able to access the special operators (similar to situation with pipes)For the components of survival data I mentioned the event indicator:
Event indicator \(\delta_i\):
However, in R
the Surv
function will also accept TRUE/FALSE (TRUE = event) or 1/2 (2 = event).
In the lung
data, we have:
The probability that a subject will survive beyond any given specified time
\[S(t) = Pr(T>t) = 1  F(t)\]
\(S(t)\): survival function \(F(t) = Pr(T \leq t)\): cumulative distribution function
In theory the survival function is smooth; in practice we observe events on a discrete time scale.
The KaplanMeier method is the most common way to estimate survival times and probabilities. It is a nonparametric approach that results in a step function, where there is a step down each time an event occurs.
Surv
function from the survival
package creates a survival object for use as the response in a model formula. There will be one entry for each subject that is the survival time, which is followed by a +
if the subject was censored. Let’s look at the first 10 observations:Surv(lung$time, lung$status)[1:10]
## [1] 306 455 1010+ 210 883 1022+ 310 361 218 166
survfit
function creates survival curves based on a formula. Let’s generate the overall survival curve for the entire cohort, assign it to object f1
, and look at the names
of that object:f1 < survfit(Surv(time, status) ~ 1, data = lung)
names(f1)
## [1] "n" "time" "n.risk" "n.event" "n.censor" "surv"
## [7] "std.err" "cumhaz" "std.chaz" "type" "logse" "conf.int"
## [13] "conf.type" "lower" "upper" "call"
Some key components of this survfit
object that will be used to create survival curves include:
time
, which contains the start and endpoints of each time intervalsurv
, which contains the survival probability corresponding to each time
Now we plot the survfit
object in base R
to get the KaplanMeier plot.
plot(survfit(Surv(time, status) ~ 1, data = lung),
xlab = "Days",
ylab = "Overall survival probability")
R
shows the step function (solid line) with associated confidence intervals (dotted lines)mark.time = TRUE
)Alternatively, the ggsurvplot
function from the survminer
package is built on ggplot2
, and can be used to create KaplanMeier plots. Checkout the cheatsheet for the survminer
package.
ggsurvplot(
fit = survfit(Surv(time, status) ~ 1, data = lung),
xlab = "Days",
ylab = "Overall survival probability")
ggsurvplot
shows the step function (solid line) with associated confidence bands (shaded area).censor = FALSE
One quantity often of interest in a survival analysis is the probability of surviving beyond a certain number (\(x\)) of years.
For example, to estimate the probability of survivng to \(1\) year, use summary
with the times
argument (Note the time
variable in the lung
data is actually in days, so we need to use times = 365.25
)
summary(survfit(Surv(time, status) ~ 1, data = lung), times = 365.25)
## Call: survfit(formula = Surv(time, status) ~ 1, data = lung)
##
## time n.risk n.event survival std.err lower 95% CI upper 95% CI
## 365 65 121 0.409 0.0358 0.345 0.486
We find that the \(1\)year probability of survival in this study is 41%.
The associated lower and upper bounds of the 95% confidence interval are also displayed.
The \(1\)year survival probability is the point on the yaxis that corresponds to \(1\) year on the xaxis for the survival curve.
What happens if you use a “naive” estimate?
121 of the 228 patients died by \(1\) year so:
\[\Big(1  \frac{121}{228}\Big) \times 100 = 47\%\]  You get an incorrect estimate of the \(1\)year probability of survival when you ignore the fact that 42 patients were censored before \(1\) year.
## Warning: Vectorized input to `element_text()` is not officially supported.
## Results may be unexpected or may change in future versions of ggplot2.
Another quantity often of interest in a survival analysis is the average survival time, which we quantify using the median. Survival times are not expected to be normally distributed so the mean is not an appropriate summary.
We can obtain this directly from our survfit
object
survfit(Surv(time, status) ~ 1, data = lung)
## Call: survfit(formula = Surv(time, status) ~ 1, data = lung)
##
## n events median 0.95LCL 0.95UCL
## 228 165 310 285 363
We see the median survival time is 310 days The lower and upper bounds of the 95% confidence interval are also displayed.
Median survival is the time corresponding to a survival probability of \(0.5\):
What happens if you use a “naive” estimate?
Summarize the median survival time among the 165 patients who died
lung %>%
filter(status == 2) %>%
summarize(median_surv = median(time))
## median_surv
## 1 226
lung
data is shown in blue for comparison## Warning: Vectorized input to `element_text()` is not officially supported.
## Results may be unexpected or may change in future versions of ggplot2.
?survdiff
for different test options)We get the logrank pvalue using the survdiff
function. For example, we can test whether there was a difference in survival time according to sex in the lung
data
survdiff(Surv(time, status) ~ sex, data = lung)
## Call:
## survdiff(formula = Surv(time, status) ~ sex, data = lung)
##
## N Observed Expected (OE)^2/E (OE)^2/V
## sex=1 138 112 91.6 4.55 10.3
## sex=2 90 53 73.4 5.68 10.3
##
## Chisq= 10.3 on 1 degrees of freedom, p= 0.001
It’s actually a bit cumbersome to extract a pvalue from the results of survdiff
. Here’s a line of code to do it
sd < survdiff(Surv(time, status) ~ sex, data = lung)
1  pchisq(sd$chisq, length(sd$n)  1)
## [1] 0.001311165
Or there is the sdp
function in the ezfun
package, which you can install using devtools::install_github("zabore/ezfun")
. It returns a formatted pvalue
ezfun::sdp(sd)
## [1] 0.001
We may want to quantify an effect size for a single variable, or include more than one variable into a regression model to account for the effects of multiple variables.
The Cox regression model is a semiparametric model that can be used to fit univariable and multivariable regression models that have survival outcomes.
\[h(tX_i) = h_0(t) \exp(\beta_1 X_{i1} + \cdots + \beta_p X_{ip})\]
\(h(t)\): hazard, or the instantaneous rate at which events occur \(h_0(t)\): underlying baseline hazard
Some key assumptions of the model:
Note: parametric regression models for survival outcomes are also available, but they won’t be addressed in this training
We can fit regression models for survival data using the coxph
function, which takes a Surv
object on the left hand side and has standard syntax for regression formulas in R
on the right hand side.
coxph(Surv(time, status) ~ sex, data = lung)
## Call:
## coxph(formula = Surv(time, status) ~ sex, data = lung)
##
## coef exp(coef) se(coef) z p
## sex 0.5310 0.5880 0.1672 3.176 0.00149
##
## Likelihood ratio test=10.63 on 1 df, p=0.001111
## n= 228, number of events= 165
We can see a tidy version of the output using the tidy
function from the broom
package:
broom::tidy(
coxph(Surv(time, status) ~ sex, data = lung),
exp = TRUE
) %>%
kable()
term  estimate  std.error  statistic  p.value 

sex  0.5880028  0.1671786  3.176385  0.0014912 
Or use tbl_regression
from the gtsummary
package
coxph(Surv(time, status) ~ sex, data = lung) %>%
gtsummary::tbl_regression(exp = TRUE)
Characteristic  HR^{1}  95% CI^{1}  pvalue 

sex  0.59  0.42, 0.82  0.001 
^{
1
}
HR = Hazard Ratio, CI = Confidence Interval

The quantity of interest from a Cox regression model is a hazard ratio (HR). The HR represents the ratio of hazards between two groups at any particular point in time.
The HR is interpreted as the instantaneous rate of occurrence of the event of interest in those who are still at risk for the event. It is not a risk, though it is commonly interpreted as such.
If you have a regression parameter \(\beta\) (from column estimate
in our coxph
) then HR = \(\exp(\beta)\).
A HR < 1 indicates reduced hazard of death whereas a HR > 1 indicates an increased hazard of death.
So our HR = 0.59 implies that around 0.6 times as many females are dying as males, at any given time.
## Warning: Vectorized input to `element_text()` is not officially supported.
## Results may be unexpected or may change in future versions of ggplot2.
In Part 1 we covered using logrank tests and Cox regression to examine associations between covariates of interest and survival outcomes.
But these analyses rely on the covariate being measured at baseline, that is, before followup time for the event begins.
What happens if you are interested in a covariate that is measured after followup time begins?
Example: Overall survival is measured from treatment start, and interest is in the association between complete response to treatment and survival.
Anderson, J., Cain, K., & Gelber, R. (1983). Analysis of survival by tumor response. Journal of Clinical Oncology : Official Journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, 1(11), 7109.
Some other possible covariates of interest in cancer research that may not be measured at baseline include:
Data on 137 bone marrow transplant patients. Variables of interest include:
T1
time (in days) to death or last followupdelta1
death indicator; 1Dead, 0AliveTA
time (in days) to acute graftversushost diseasedeltaA
acute graftversushost disease indicator; 1Developed acute graftversushost disease, 0Never developed acute graftversushost diseaseLet’s load the data for use in examples throughout
data(BMT, package = "SemiCompRisks")
In the BMT
data interest is in the association between acute graft versus host disease (aGVHD) and survival. But aGVHD is assessed after the transplant, which is our baseline, or start of followup, time.
Step 1 Select landmark time
Typically aGVHD occurs within the first 90 days following transplant, so we use a 90day landmark.
Interest is in the association between acute graft versus host disease (aGVHD) and survival. But aGVHD is assessed after the transplant, which is our baseline, or start of followup, time.
Step 2 Subset population for those followed at least until landmark time
lm_dat <
BMT %>%
filter(T1 >= 90)
This reduces our sample size from 137 to 122.
Interest is in the association between acute graft versus host disease (aGVHD) and survival. But aGVHD is assessed after the transplant, which is our baseline, or start of followup, time.
Step 3 Calculate followup time from landmark and apply traditional methods.
lm_dat <
lm_dat %>%
mutate(
lm_T1 = T1  90
)
lm_fit < survfit(Surv(lm_T1, delta1) ~ deltaA, data = lm_dat)
## Warning: Vectorized input to `element_text()` is not officially supported.
## Results may be unexpected or may change in future versions of ggplot2.
In Cox regression you can use the subset
option in coxph
to exclude those patients who were not followed through the landmark time
coxph(
Surv(T1, delta1) ~ deltaA,
subset = T1 >= 90,
data = BMT
) %>%
gtsummary::tbl_regression(exp = TRUE)
Characteristic  HR^{1}  95% CI^{1}  pvalue 

deltaA  1.08  0.57, 2.07  0.8 
^{
1
}
HR = Hazard Ratio, CI = Confidence Interval

An alternative to a landmark analysis is incorporation of a timedependent covariate. This may be more appropriate when
Analysis of timedependent covariates in R
requires setup of a special dataset. See the detailed paper on this by the author of the survival
package Using Time Dependent Covariates and Time Dependent Coefficients in the Cox Model.
There was no ID variable in the BMT
data, which is needed to create the special dataset, so create one called my_id
.
bmt < rowid_to_column(BMT, "my_id")
Use the tmerge
function with the event
and tdc
function options to create the special dataset.
tmerge
creates a long dataset with multiple time intervals for the different covariate values for each patientevent
creates the new event indicator to go with the newly created time intervalstdc
creates the timedependent covariate indicator to go with the newly created time intervalstd_dat <
tmerge(
data1 = bmt %>% select(my_id, T1, delta1),
data2 = bmt %>% select(my_id, T1, delta1, TA, deltaA),
id = my_id,
death = event(T1, delta1),
agvhd = tdc(TA)
)
To see what this does, let’s look at the data for the first 5 individual patients.
The variables of interest in the original data looked like
## my_id T1 delta1 TA deltaA
## 1 1 2081 0 67 1
## 2 2 1602 0 1602 0
## 3 3 1496 0 1496 0
## 4 4 1462 0 70 1
## 5 5 1433 0 1433 0
The new dataset for these same patients looks like
## my_id T1 delta1 id tstart tstop death agvhd
## 1 1 2081 0 1 0 67 0 0
## 2 1 2081 0 1 67 2081 0 1
## 3 2 1602 0 2 0 1602 0 0
## 4 3 1496 0 3 0 1496 0 0
## 5 4 1462 0 4 0 70 0 0
## 6 4 1462 0 4 70 1462 0 1
## 7 5 1433 0 5 0 1433 0 0
Now we can analyze this timedependent covariate as usual using Cox regression with coxph
and an alteration to our use of Surv
to include arguments to both time
and time2
coxph(
Surv(time = tstart, time2 = tstop, event = death) ~ agvhd,
data = td_dat
) %>%
gtsummary::tbl_regression(exp = TRUE)
Characteristic  HR^{1}  95% CI^{1}  pvalue 

agvhd  1.40  0.81, 2.43  0.2 
^{
1
}
HR = Hazard Ratio, CI = Confidence Interval

We find that acute graft versus host disease is not significantly associated with death using either landmark analysis or a timedependent covariate.
Often one will want to use landmark analysis for visualization of a single covariate, and Cox regression with a timedependent covariate for univariable and multivariable modeling.
The primary package for use in competing risks analyses is
cmprsk
library(cmprsk)
When subjects have multiple possible events in a timetoevent setting
Examples:
All or some of these (among others) may be possible events in any given study.
Unobserved dependence among event times is the fundamental problem that leads to the need for special consideration.
For example, one can imagine that patients who recur are more likely to die, and therefore times to recurrence and times to death would not be independent events.
Two approaches to analysis in the presence of multiple potential outcomes:
Each of these approaches may only illuminate one important aspect of the data while possibly obscuring others, and the chosen approach should depend on the question of interest.
Dignam JJ, Zhang Q, Kocherginsky M. The use and interpretation of competing risks regression models. Clin Cancer Res. 2012;18(8):23018.
Kim HT. Cumulative incidence in competing risks data and competing risks regression analysis. Clin Cancer Res. 2007 Jan 15;13(2 Pt 1):55965.
Satagopan JM, BenPorat L, Berwick M, Robson M, Kutler D, Auerbach AD. A note on competing risks in survival data analysis. Br J Cancer. 2004;91(7):122935.
Austin, P., & Fine, J. (2017). Practical recommendations for reporting Fine‐Gray model analyses for competing risk data. Statistics in Medicine, 36(27), 43914400.
We use the Melanoma
data from the MASS
package to illustrate these concepts. It contains variables:
time
survival time in days, possibly censored.status
1 died from melanoma, 2 alive, 3 dead from other causes.sex
1 = male, 0 = female.age
age in years.year
of operation.thickness
tumor thickness in mm.ulcer
1 = presence, 0 = absence.data(Melanoma, package = "MASS")
Estimate the cumulative incidence in the context of competing risks using the cuminc
function.
Note: in the Melanoma
data, censored patients are coded as \(2\) for status
, so we cannot use the cencode
option default of \(0\)
cuminc(Melanoma$time, Melanoma$status, cencode = 2)
## Estimates and Variances:
## $est
## 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000
## 1 1 0.12745714 0.23013963 0.30962017 0.3387175 0.3387175
## 1 3 0.03426709 0.05045644 0.05811143 0.1059471 0.1059471
##
## $var
## 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000
## 1 1 0.0005481186 0.0009001172 0.0013789328 0.001690760 0.001690760
## 1 3 0.0001628354 0.0002451319 0.0002998642 0.001040155 0.001040155
Generate a base R
plot with all the defaults.
ci_fit <
cuminc(
ftime = Melanoma$time,
fstatus = Melanoma$status,
cencode = 2
)
plot(ci_fit)
In the legend:
We can also plot the cumulative incidence using the ggscompetingrisks
function from the survminer
package.
In this case we get a panel labeled according to the group, and a legend labeled event, indicating the type of event for each line.
Notes
multiple_panels = FALSE
to have all groups plotted on a single panelR
the yaxis does not go to 1 by default, so you must change it manuallyggcompetingrisks(ci_fit)
In cuminc
Gray’s test is used for betweengroup tests.
As an example, compare the Melanoma
outcomes according to ulcer
, the presence or absence of ulceration. The results of the tests can be found in Tests
.
ci_ulcer <
cuminc(
ftime = Melanoma$time,
fstatus = Melanoma$status,
group = Melanoma$ulcer,
cencode = 2
)
ci_ulcer[["Tests"]]
## stat pv df
## 1 26.120719 3.207240e07 1
## 3 0.158662 6.903913e01 1
ggcompetingrisks(
fit = ci_ulcer,
multiple_panels = FALSE,
xlab = "Days",
ylab = "Cumulative incidence of event",
title = "Death by ulceration",
ylim = c(0, 1)
)
Note I personally find the ggcompetingrisks
function to be lacking in customization, especially compared to ggsurvplot
. I typically do my own plotting, by first creating a tidy dataset of the cuminc
fit results, and then plotting the results. See the source code for this presentation for details of the underlying code.
Often only one of the event types will be of interest, though we still want to account for the competing event. In that case the event of interest can be plotted alone. Again, I do this manually by first creating a tidy dataset of the cuminc
fit results, and then plotting the results. See the source code for this presentation for details of the underlying code.
You may want to add the numbers of risk table to a cumulative incidence plot, and there is no easy way to do this that I know of. See the source code for this presentation for one example (by popular demand, source code now included directly below for one specific example)
R
, ggcompetingrisks
, or ggplot
mel_plot <
ggplot(ciplotdat1, aes(x = time, y = est, color = Ulceration)) +
geom_step(lwd = 1.2) +
ylim(c(0, 1)) +
coord_cartesian(xlim = c(0, 5000)) +
scale_x_continuous(breaks = seq(0, 5000, 1000)) +
theme_classic() +
theme(plot.title = element_text(size = 14),
legend.title = element_blank(),
legend.position = "bottom") +
labs(x = "Days",
y = "Cumulative incidence",
title = "Melanoma death by ulceration status") +
annotate("text", x = 0, y = 1, hjust = 0,
label = paste0(
"pvalue = ",
ifelse(ci_ulcer$Tests[1, 2] < .001,
"<.001",
round(ci_ulcer$Tests[1, 2], 3))))
ggsurvplot
using the survfit
where all events count as a single composite endpoint
mel_fit < survfit(
Surv(time, ifelse(status != 2, 1, 0)) ~ ulcer,
data = Melanoma
)
num < ggsurvplot(
fit = mel_fit,
risk.table = TRUE,
risk.table.y.text = FALSE,
ylab = "Days",
risk.table.fontsize = 3.2,
tables.theme = theme_survminer(font.main = 10),
title = "Test"
)
plot_grid
function from the cowplot
package for this
tables.theme = theme_survminer(font.main = 10)
!cowplot::plot_grid(
mel_plot,
num$table + theme_cleantable(),
nrow = 2,
rel_heights = c(4, 1),
align = "v",
axis = "b"
)
Two approaches:
coxph
function)crr
function)Let’s say we’re interested in looking at the effect of age and sex on death from melanoma, with death from other causes as a competing event.
Notes:
crr
requires specification of covariates as a matrixfailcode
option, by default results are returned for failcode = 1
shr_fit <
crr(
ftime = Melanoma$time,
fstatus = Melanoma$status,
cov1 = Melanoma[, c("sex", "age")],
cencode = 2
)
shr_fit
## convergence: TRUE
## coefficients:
## sex age
## 0.58840 0.01259
## standard errors:
## [1] 0.271800 0.009301
## twosided pvalues:
## sex age
## 0.03 0.18
In the previous example, both sex
and age
were coded as numeric variables. The crr
function can’t naturally handle character variables, and you will get an error, so if character variables are present we have to create dummy variables using model.matrix
# Create an example character variable
chardat <
Melanoma %>%
mutate(
sex_char = ifelse(sex == 0, "Male", "Female")
)
# Create dummy variables with model.matrix
# The [, 1] removes the intercept
covs1 < model.matrix(~ sex_char + age, data = chardat)[, 1]
# Now we can pass that to the cov1 argument, and it will work
crr(
ftime = chardat$time,
fstatus = chardat$status,
cov1 = covs1,
cencode = 2
)
Output from crr
is not supported by either broom::tidy()
or gtsummary::tbl_regression()
at this time. As an alternative, try the (not flexible, but better than nothing?) mvcrrres
from my ezfun
package
ezfun::mvcrrres(shr_fit) %>%
kable()
HR (95% CI)  pvalue  

sex  1.8 (1.06, 3.07)  0.03 
age  1.01 (0.99, 1.03)  0.18 
Censor all subjects who didn’t have the event of interest, in this case death from melanoma, and use coxph
as before. So patients who died from other causes are now censored for the causespecific hazard approach to competing risks.
Results can be formatted with broom::tidy()
or gtsummary::tbl_regression()
chr_fit <
coxph(
Surv(time, ifelse(status == 1, 1, 0)) ~ sex + age,
data = Melanoma
)
broom::tidy(chr_fit, exp = TRUE) %>%
kable()
term  estimate  std.error  statistic  p.value 

sex  1.818949  0.2676386  2.235323  0.0253961 
age  1.016679  0.0086628  1.909514  0.0561958 
gtsummary::tbl_regression(chr_fit, exp = TRUE)
Characteristic  HR^{1}  95% CI^{1}  pvalue 

sex  1.82  1.08, 3.07  0.025 
age  1.02  1.00, 1.03  0.056 
^{
1
}
HR = Hazard Ratio, CI = Confidence Interval

A variety of bits and pieces of things that may come up and be handy to know:
One assumption of the Cox proportional hazards regression model is that the hazards are proportional at each point in time throughout followup. How can we check to see if our data meet this assumption?
Use the cox.zph
function from the survival package. It results in two main things:
mv_fit < coxph(Surv(time, status) ~ sex + age, data = lung)
cz < cox.zph(mv_fit)
print(cz)
## chisq df p
## sex 2.608 1 0.11
## age 0.209 1 0.65
## GLOBAL 2.771 2 0.25
plot(cz)
Sometimes you will want to visualize a survival estimate according to a continuous variable. The sm.survival
function from the sm
package allows you to do this for a quantile of the distribution of survival data. The default quantile is p = 0.5
for median survival.
library(sm)
sm.options(
list(
xlab = "Age (years)",
ylab = "Time to death (years)")
)
sm.survival(
x = lung$age,
y = lung$time,
status = lung$status,
h = sd(lung$age) / nrow(lung)^(1/4)
)
The option h
is the smoothing parameter. This should be related to the standard deviation of the continuous covariate, \(x\). Suggested to start with \(\frac{sd(x)}{n^{1/4}}\) then reduce by \(1/2\), \(1/4\), etc to get a good amount of smoothing. The previous plot was too smooth so let’s reduce it by \(1/4\)
sm.survival(
x = lung$age,
y = lung$time,
status = lung$status,
h = (1/4) * sd(lung$age) / nrow(lung)^(1/4)
)
Sometimes it is of interest to generate survival estimates among a group of patients who have already survived for some length of time.
\[S(yx) = \frac{S(x + y)}{S(x)}\]
Zabor, E., Gonen, M., Chapman, P., & Panageas, K. (2013). Dynamic prognostication using conditional survival estimates. Cancer, 119(20), 35893592.
The estimates are easy to generate with basic math on your own.
Alternatively, I have simple package in development called condsurv
to generate estimates and plots related to conditional survival. We can use the conditional_surv_est
function to get estimates and 95% confidence intervals. Let’s condition on survival to 6months
remotes::install_github("zabore/condsurv")
library(condsurv)
fit1 < survfit(Surv(time, status) ~ 1, data = lung)
prob_times < seq(365.25, 182.625 * 5, 182.625)
purrr::map_df(
prob_times,
~conditional_surv_est(
basekm = fit1,
t1 = 182.625,
t2 = .x)
) %>%
mutate(months = round(prob_times / 30.4)) %>%
select(months, everything()) %>%
kable()
months  cs_est  cs_lci  cs_uci 

12  0.58  0.49  0.66 
18  0.36  0.27  0.45 
24  0.16  0.10  0.25 
30  0.07  0.02  0.15 
Recall that our initial \(1\)year survival estimate was 0.41. We see that for patients who have already survived 6months this increases to 0.58.
We can also visualize conditional survival data based on different lengths of time survived. The condsurv::condKMggplot
function can help with this.
cond_times < seq(0, 182.625 * 4, 182.625)
gg_conditional_surv(
basekm = fit1,
at = cond_times,
main = "Conditional survival in lung data",
xlab = "Days"
) +
labs(color = "Conditional time")
The resulting plot has one survival curve for each time on which we condition. In this case the first line is the overall survival curve since it is conditioning on time 0.
knit_exit()