Comparative survival analysis evaluates non-proportional hazards models in 2433 breast cancer patients, highlighting distinct performance trade-offs in long-term risk estimation.
Several modelling techniques have been proposed for non-proportional hazards. In this work we consider different models which can be classified into three wide categories: models with time-varying effects of the covariates; frailty models and cure rate models. We present those different extensions of the proportional hazards model on an application of 2433 breast cancer patients with a long follow-up. We comment on the differences and similarities among the models and evaluate their performance using survival and hazard plots, Brier scores and pseudo-observations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Perperoglou et al. (2006) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: