TY - JOUR
T1 - Using observational data to estimate prognosis
T2 - An example using a coronary artery disease registry
AU - Delong, Elizabeth R.
AU - Nelson, Charlotte L.
AU - Wong, John B.
AU - Pryor, David B.
AU - Peterson, Eric D.
AU - Lee, Kerry L.
AU - Mark, Daniel B.
AU - Califf, Robert M.
AU - Pauker, Stephen G.
PY - 2001/8/30
Y1 - 2001/8/30
N2 - With the proliferation of clinical data registries and the rising expense of clinical trials, observational data sources are increasingly providing evidence for clinical decision making. These data are viewed as complementary to randomized clinical trials (RCT). While not as rigorous a methodological design, observational studies yield important information about effectiveness of treatment, as compared with the efficacy results of RCTs. In addition, these studies often have the advantage of providing longer-term follow-up, beyond that of clinical trials. Hence, they are useful for assessing and comparing patients' long-term prognosis under different treatment strategies. For patients with coronary artery disease, many observational comparisons have focused on medical therapy versus interventional procedures. In addition to the well-studied problem of treatment selection bias (which is not the focus of the present study), three significant methodological problems must be addressed in the analysis of these data: (i) designation of the therapeutic arms in the presence of early deaths, withdrawals, and treatment cross-overs; (ii) identification of an equitable starting point for attributing survival time; (iii) site to site variability in short-term mortality. This paper discusses these issues and suggests strategies to deal with them. A proposed methodology is developed, applied and evaluated on a large observational database that has long-term follow-up on nearly 10 000 patients.
AB - With the proliferation of clinical data registries and the rising expense of clinical trials, observational data sources are increasingly providing evidence for clinical decision making. These data are viewed as complementary to randomized clinical trials (RCT). While not as rigorous a methodological design, observational studies yield important information about effectiveness of treatment, as compared with the efficacy results of RCTs. In addition, these studies often have the advantage of providing longer-term follow-up, beyond that of clinical trials. Hence, they are useful for assessing and comparing patients' long-term prognosis under different treatment strategies. For patients with coronary artery disease, many observational comparisons have focused on medical therapy versus interventional procedures. In addition to the well-studied problem of treatment selection bias (which is not the focus of the present study), three significant methodological problems must be addressed in the analysis of these data: (i) designation of the therapeutic arms in the presence of early deaths, withdrawals, and treatment cross-overs; (ii) identification of an equitable starting point for attributing survival time; (iii) site to site variability in short-term mortality. This paper discusses these issues and suggests strategies to deal with them. A proposed methodology is developed, applied and evaluated on a large observational database that has long-term follow-up on nearly 10 000 patients.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0035974981&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0035974981&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1002/sim.930
DO - 10.1002/sim.930
M3 - Article
C2 - 11512139
AN - SCOPUS:0035974981
SN - 0277-6715
VL - 20
SP - 2505
EP - 2532
JO - Statistics in Medicine
JF - Statistics in Medicine
IS - 16
ER -