Additive Interaction in Survival Analysis: Use of the Additive Hazards Model

It is a widely held belief in public health and clinical decision-making that interventions or preventive strategies should be aimed at patients or population subgroups where most cases could potentially be prevented. To identify such subgroups, deviation from additivity of absolute effects is the relevant measure of interest. Multiplicative survival models, such as the Cox proportional hazards model, are often used to estimate the association between exposure and risk of disease in prospective studies. In Cox models, deviations from additivity have usually been assessed by surrogate measures of additive interaction derived from multiplicative models—an approach that is both counter-intuitive and sometimes invalid. This paper presents a straightforward and intuitive way of assessing deviation from additivity of effects in survival analysis by use of the additive hazards model. The model directly estimates the absolute size of the deviation from additivity and provides confidence intervals. In addition, the model can accommodate both continuous and categorical exposures and models both exposures and potential confounders on the same underlying scale. To illustrate the approach, we present an empirical example of interaction between education and smoking on risk of lung cancer. We argue that deviations from additivity of effects are important for public health interventions and clinical decision-making, and such estimations should be encouraged in prospective studies on health. A detailed implementation guide of the additive hazards model is provided in the appendix.

[1]  E. Blas,et al.  Equity, social determinants and public health programmes. , 2010 .

[2]  D. Lawlor Biological interaction: time to drop the term? , 2011, Epidemiology.

[3]  M. Dufour,et al.  Epidemiology. Introduction. , 1995, Recent developments in alcoholism : an official publication of the American Medical Society on Alcoholism, the Research Society on Alcoholism, and the National Council on Alcoholism.

[4]  R. Saracci Interaction and synergism. , 1980, American journal of epidemiology.

[5]  Babette Brumback,et al.  On effect‐measure modification: Relationships among changes in the relative risk, odds ratio, and risk difference , 2008, Statistics in medicine.

[6]  N. Day,et al.  Synergism and interaction: are they equivalent? , 1979, American journal of epidemiology.

[7]  Odd Aalen,et al.  A Model for Nonparametric Regression Analysis of Counting Processes , 1980 .

[8]  A. Tjønneland,et al.  Study design, exposure variables, and socioeconomic determinants of participation in Diet, Cancer and Health: A population-based prospective cohort study of 57,053 men and women in Denmark , 2007, Scandinavian journal of public health.

[9]  S. Harper,et al.  Explaining the social gradient in coronary heart disease: comparing relative and absolute risk approaches , 2006, Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health.

[10]  M. Grønbæk,et al.  Interactions between intakes of alcohol and postmenopausal hormones on risk of breast cancer , 2007, International journal of cancer.

[11]  O. Aalen,et al.  Survival and Event History Analysis: A Process Point of View , 2008 .

[12]  T. VanderWeele,et al.  Interpretation of Subgroup Analyses in Randomized Trials: Heterogeneity Versus Secondary Interventions , 2011, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[13]  P. Mäkelä,et al.  Do consequences of a given pattern of drinking vary by socioeconomic status? A mortality and hospitalisation follow-up for alcohol-related causes of the Finnish Drinking Habits Surveys , 2008, Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health.

[14]  Sander Greenland,et al.  Interactions in Epidemiology: Relevance, Identification, and Estimation , 2009, Epidemiology.

[15]  Ian W. McKeague,et al.  A partly parametric additive risk model , 1994 .

[16]  Torben Martinussen,et al.  Dynamic Regression Models for Survival Data , 2006 .

[17]  T. VanderWeele Causal Interactions in the Proportional Hazards Model , 2011, Epidemiology.

[18]  D. Jarvis,et al.  Human Genome Epidemiology ( HuGE ) Review Interactive Effects of Antioxidant Genes and Air Pollution on Respiratory Function and Airway Disease : A HuGE Review , 2011 .

[19]  J. Kaufman Interaction reaction. , 2009, Epidemiology.

[20]  M. Marmot,et al.  INEQUALITIES IN DEATH—SPECIFIC EXPLANATIONS OF A GENERAL PATTERN? , 1984, The Lancet.

[21]  L. Chambless,et al.  Test for additive interaction in proportional hazards models. , 2007, Annals of epidemiology.

[22]  G. Shaw,et al.  Maternal pesticide exposure from multiple sources and selected congenital anomalies. , 1999 .

[23]  J. Pearl,et al.  Causal diagrams for epidemiologic research. , 1999, Epidemiology.

[24]  T. Jørgensen,et al.  The cohorts at the Research Centre for Prevention and Health, formerly 'The Glostrup Population Studies'. , 2011, International journal of epidemiology.

[25]  Tyler J VanderWeele,et al.  Sufficient Cause Interactions and Statistical Interactions , 2009, Epidemiology.

[26]  Anders Skrondal,et al.  Interaction as departure from additivity in case-control studies: a cautionary note. , 2003, American journal of epidemiology.

[27]  Claus Dethlefsen,et al.  Obesity, Behavioral Lifestyle Factors, and Risk of Acute Coronary Events , 2008, Circulation.

[28]  S. Pocock,et al.  Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): Explanation and Elaboration , 2007, PLoS medicine.

[29]  A. Mukhopadhyay Equity, social determinants and public health programmes , 2011 .

[30]  T. VanderWeele On the Distinction Between Interaction and Effect Modification , 2009, Epidemiology.

[31]  S Greenland,et al.  Concepts of interaction. , 1980, American journal of epidemiology.