» Articles » PMID: 35039069

Graphical Calibration Curves and the Integrated Calibration Index (ICI) for Competing Risk Models

Overview
Journal Diagn Progn Res
Publisher Biomed Central
Date 2022 Jan 18
PMID 35039069
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Assessing calibration-the agreement between estimated risk and observed proportions-is an important component of deriving and validating clinical prediction models. Methods for assessing the calibration of prognostic models for use with competing risk data have received little attention.

Methods: We propose a method for graphically assessing the calibration of competing risk regression models. Our proposed method can be used to assess the calibration of any model for estimating incidence in the presence of competing risk (e.g., a Fine-Gray subdistribution hazard model; a combination of cause-specific hazard functions; or a random survival forest). Our method is based on using the Fine-Gray subdistribution hazard model to regress the cumulative incidence function of the cause-specific outcome of interest on the predicted outcome risk of the model whose calibration we want to assess. We provide modifications of the integrated calibration index (ICI), of E50 and of E90, which are numerical calibration metrics, for use with competing risk data. We conducted a series of Monte Carlo simulations to evaluate the performance of these calibration measures when the underlying model has been correctly specified and when the model was mis-specified and when the incidence of the cause-specific outcome differed between the derivation and validation samples. We illustrated the usefulness of calibration curves and the numerical calibration metrics by comparing the calibration of a Fine-Gray subdistribution hazards regression model with that of random survival forests for predicting cardiovascular mortality in patients hospitalized with heart failure.

Results: The simulations indicated that the method for constructing graphical calibration curves and the associated calibration metrics performed as desired. We also demonstrated that the numerical calibration metrics can be used as optimization criteria when tuning machine learning methods for competing risk outcomes.

Conclusions: The calibration curves and numeric calibration metrics permit a comprehensive comparison of the calibration of different competing risk models.

Citing Articles

A decision-analytical perspective on incorporating multiple outcomes in the production of clinical prediction models: defining a taxonomy of risk estimands.

Martin G, Pate A, Bladon S, Sperrin M, Riley R BMC Med. 2025; 23(1):142.

PMID: 40050803 PMC: 11887178. DOI: 10.1186/s12916-025-03978-3.


A Bayesian Joint Model of Multiple Nonlinear Longitudinal and Competing Risks Outcomes for Dynamic Prediction in Multiple Myeloma: Joint Estimation and Corrected Two-Stage Approaches.

Alvares D, Barrett J, Mercier F, Roumpanis S, Yiu S, Castro F Stat Med. 2025; 44(3-4):e10322.

PMID: 39865588 PMC: 11771571. DOI: 10.1002/sim.10322.


Development, validation and recalibration of a prediction model for prediabetes: an EHR and NHANES-based study.

Casacchia N, Lenoir K, Rigdon J, Wells B BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2024; 24(1):387.

PMID: 39696411 PMC: 11657225. DOI: 10.1186/s12911-024-02803-w.


Using Joint Longitudinal and Time-to-Event Models to Improve the Parameterization of Chronic Disease Microsimulation Models: an Application to Cardiovascular Disease.

Giardina J, Haneuse S, Pandya A medRxiv. 2024; .

PMID: 39574877 PMC: 11581079. DOI: 10.1101/2024.10.27.24316240.


Derivation and validation of an algorithm to predict transitions from community to residential long-term care among persons with dementia-A retrospective cohort study.

Li W, Turcotte L, Hsu A, Talarico R, Qureshi D, Webber C PLOS Digit Health. 2024; 3(10):e0000441.

PMID: 39423179 PMC: 11488705. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pdig.0000441.


References
1.
Geskus R . Cause-specific cumulative incidence estimation and the fine and gray model under both left truncation and right censoring. Biometrics. 2010; 67(1):39-49. DOI: 10.1111/j.1541-0420.2010.01420.x. View

2.
Wolbers M, Koller M, Witteman J, Steyerberg E . Prognostic models with competing risks: methods and application to coronary risk prediction. Epidemiology. 2009; 20(4):555-61. DOI: 10.1097/EDE.0b013e3181a39056. View

3.
Austin P, Lee D, Fine J . Introduction to the Analysis of Survival Data in the Presence of Competing Risks. Circulation. 2016; 133(6):601-9. PMC: 4741409. DOI: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.115.017719. View

4.
Austin P, Fine J . Propensity-score matching with competing risks in survival analysis. Stat Med. 2018; 38(5):751-777. PMC: 6900780. DOI: 10.1002/sim.8008. View

5.
Austin P, Harrell Jr F, van Klaveren D . Graphical calibration curves and the integrated calibration index (ICI) for survival models. Stat Med. 2020; 39(21):2714-2742. PMC: 7497089. DOI: 10.1002/sim.8570. View