Comparing Modeling Approaches for Discrete Event Simulations With Competing Risks Based on Censored Individual Patient Data: A Simulation Study and Illustration in Colorectal Cancer [Editor's Choice]

Abstract

Objectives

This study aimed to provide detailed guidance on modeling approaches for implementing competing events in discrete event simulations based on censored individual patient data (IPD).

Methods

The event-specific distributions (ESDs) approach sampled times from event-specific time-to-event distributions and simulated the first event to occur. The unimodal distribution and regression approach sampled a time from a combined unimodal time-to-event distribution, representing all events, and used a (multinomial) logistic regression model to select the event to be simulated. A simulation study assessed performance in terms of relative absolute event incidence difference and relative entropy of time-to-event distributions for different types and levels of right censoring, numbers of events, distribution overlap, and sample sizes. Differences in cost-effectiveness estimates were illustrated in a colorectal cancer case study.

Results

Increased levels of censoring negatively affected the modeling approaches’ performance. A lower number of competing events and higher overlap of distributions improved performance. When IPD were censored at random times, ESD performed best. When censoring occurred owing to a maximum follow-up time for 2 events, ESD performed better for a low level of censoring (ie, 10%). For 3 or 4 competing events, ESD better represented the probabilities of events, whereas unimodal distribution and regression better represented the time to events. Differences in cost-effectiveness estimates, both compared with no censoring and between approaches, increased with increasing censoring levels.

Conclusions

Modelers should be aware of the different modeling approaches available and that selection between approaches may be informed by data characteristics. Performing and reporting extensive validation efforts remains essential to ensure IPD are appropriately represented.

Authors

Koen Degeling Maarten J. IJzerman Catharina G.M. Groothuis-Oudshoorn Mira D. Franken Miriam Koopman Mark S. Clements Hendrik Koffijberg

Explore Related HEOR by Topic


Your browser is out-of-date

ISPOR recommends that you update your browser for more security, speed and the best experience on ispor.org. Update my browser now

×