Comparing proportional hazards and accelerated failure time models: an application in influenza

The proportional hazards (PH) model is routinely employed for the analysis of time-to-event data in medical research when it is required to assess the effect of an intervention in the presence of covariates. The assumption of PH required for the PH approach may not hold, especially in circumstances where the effect of the intervention is to delay or accelerate the onset of an event rather than to reduce or increase the overall proportion of subjects who observe the event through time. If the assumption of PH is violated, the results from a PH model will be difficult to generalize to situations where the length of follow-up is different to that used in the analysis. It is also difficult to translate the results into the effect upon the expected median duration of illness for a patient in a clinical setting. The accelerated failure time (AFT) approach is an alternative strategy for the analysis of time-to-event data and can be suitable even when hazards are not proportional and this family of models contains a certain form of PH as a special case. The framework can allow for different forms of the hazard function and may provide a closer description of the data in certain circumstances. In addition, the results of the AFT model may be easier to interpret and more relevant to clinicians, as they can be directly translated into expected reduction or prolongation of the median time to event, unlike the hazard ratio. We recommend that consideration is given to an AFT modelling approach in the analysis of time-to-event data in medical research.

[1]  Oliver N Keene,et al.  Alternatives to the hazard ratio in summarizing efficacy in time‐to‐event studies: an example from influenza trials , 2002, Statistics in medicine.

[2]  M. Cowles Modelling Survival Data in Medical Research (2nd ed.) (Book) , 2004 .

[3]  M. Grace,et al.  Hazard Ratio in Clinical Trials , 2004, Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy.

[4]  S. Love,et al.  Survival Analysis Part III: Multivariate data analysis – choosing a model and assessing its adequacy and fit , 2003, British Journal of Cancer.

[5]  Vicente Núñez-Antón,et al.  Comparing proportional hazards and accelerated failure time models for survival analysis , 2002, Statistics in medicine.

[6]  T G Clark,et al.  Survival Analysis Part I: Basic concepts and first analyses , 2003, British Journal of Cancer.

[7]  Richard Kay,et al.  On the Use of the Accelerated Failure Time Model As An Alternative to the Proportional Hazards Model in the Treatment of Time to Event Data: A Case Study in Influenza , 2002 .

[8]  Richard Kay An explanation of the hazard ratio , 2004 .

[9]  S. Trottier,et al.  Efficacy and safety of oseltamivir in treatment of acute influenza: a randomised controlled trial , 2000, The Lancet.

[10]  John J. Treanor,et al.  Efficacy and Safety of the Oral Neuraminidase Inhibitor Oseltamivir in Treating Acute Influenza , 2000 .

[11]  S. Love,et al.  Survival Analysis Part II: Multivariate data analysis – an introduction to concepts and methods , 2003, British Journal of Cancer.

[12]  P. Allison Survival analysis using the SAS system : a practical guide , 1995 .

[13]  D. Cox Regression Models and Life-Tables , 1972 .