Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
A topic that has received attention in both the statistical and medical literature is the estimation of the probability of failure for endpoints that are subject to competing risks. Despite this, it is not uncommon to see the complement of the Kaplan-Meier estimate used in this setting and interpreted as the probability of failure. If one desires an estimate that can be interpreted in this way, however, the cumulative incidence estimate is the appropriate tool to use in such situations. We believe the more commonly seen representations of the Kaplan-Meier estimate and the cumulative incidence estimate do not lend themselves to easy explanation and understanding of this interpretation. We present, therefore, a representation of each estimate in a manner not ordinarily seen, each representation utilizing the concept of censored observations being 'redistributed to the right.' We feel these allow a more intuitive understanding of each estimate and therefore an appreciation of why the Kaplan-Meier method is inappropriate for estimation purposes in the presence of competing risks, while the cumulative incidence estimate is appropriate.
Gooley et al. (1999) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: