Application of BRACE Method to Address Treatment Selection Bias in Observational Data
Williamson, C. W.; Nelson, T. J.; Thompson, C. A.; Vitzthum, L. K.; Zakeri, K.; Riviere, P. J.; Bryant, A. K.; Sharabi, A. B.; Zou, J.; Mell, L. K.
Show abstract
BackgroundCancer treatments can paradoxically appear to reduce the risk of non-cancer mortality in observational studies, due to residual confounding from treatment selection bias. Here we apply a novel method, Bias Reduction through Analysis of Competing Events (BRACE), to reduce bias in the presence of residual confounding. MethodsWe studied 36630 prostate cancer patients, 4069 lung cancer patients, and 7117 head/neck cancer patients, using the Veterans Affairs Informatics and Computing Infrastructure database. We estimated effects of intensive treatment (prostate: prostatectomy vs. radiotherapy; lung: lobectomy vs. sublobar resection or radiotherapy; head/neck: radiotherapy with concurrent cisplatin and/or multiagent induction vs. radiotherapy with or without alternative systemic therapy) on cancer-specific mortality, non-cancer mortality, and overall survival (OS), using both multivariable Cox (MVA) and propensity score (inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW)) models. Next, we applied the BRACE method to adjust for residual confounding, based on the observed treatment effect on competing event and relative event hazards. ResultsFor each cohort, intensive treatment was associated with significantly reduced hazards for cancer-specific mortality, non-cancer mortality, and OS. Compared to the results for MVA and IPTW models, hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) for the effect of intensive treatment on OS were attenuated in each cohort after applying BRACE: (prostate-MVA: 0.75 (0.71, 0.80), IPTW: 0.73 (0.66, 0.75), BRACE: 0.98 (0.95, 1.00); lung-0.79 (0.68, 0.91), 0.79 (0.66, 0.89), BRACE: 0.81 (0.65, 0.94); head/neck-0.71 (0.66, 0.76), 0.70 (0.66, 0.76), BRACE: 0.81 (0.76, 0.86)). BRACE estimates were similar to findings from meta-analyses and randomized trials. ConclusionsWe found evidence of residual confounding in several observational cohorts after applying standard methods, which were mitigated after applying BRACE. Application of this method could provide more reliable estimates and inferences when residual confounding is identified and represents a novel approach to improving the validity of outcomes research.
Matching journals
The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Age-related differences in cancer relative survival in the US: a SEER-18 analysis 94%
- Inequalities in relative cancer survival by race, immigration status, income, and education for 22 cancer sites in Canada, a cohort study 93%
- Predicted long-term impact of COVID-19 pandemic-related care delays on cancer incidence and mortality in Canada 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Comparison of Radiomic Feature Aggregation Methods for Patients with Multiple Tumors 94%
- Development and Characterization of Patient-Derived Xenografts from Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Brain Metastases 92%
- Pan-cancer analyses of the associations between 109 pre-existing conditions and cancer treatment patterns across 19 adult cancers 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Human Papilloma Virus Circulating Cell-Free DNA Kinetics in Cervical Cancer Patients Undergoing Definitive Chemoradiation 93%
- PSMA+ Extracellular Vesicles are a Biomarker for SABR in Oligorecurrent Prostate Cancer Analysis from the STOMP-like and ORIOLE trial cohorts 93%
- Leveraging Longitudinal Patient-Reported Outcomes Trajectories to Predict Survival in Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Efficacy and Cost of High-Frequency IGRT in Elderly Stage III Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer Patients 95%
- Survival benefits of cytoreductive nephrectomy in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma: evidence from a SEER-based retrospective cohort study 94%
- Survival benefit of adjuvant therapy following neoadjuvant therapy in patients with resected esophageal cancer: a retrospective cohort study 92%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.