» Articles » PMID: 35984990

The Timing, the Treatment, the Question: Comparison of Epidemiologic Approaches to Minimize Immortal Time Bias in Real-World Data Using a Surgical Oncology Example

Overview
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Studies evaluating the effects of cancer treatments are prone to immortal time bias that, if unaddressed, can lead to treatments appearing more beneficial than they are.

Methods: To demonstrate the impact of immortal time bias, we compared results across several analytic approaches (dichotomous exposure, dichotomous exposure excluding immortal time, time-varying exposure, landmark analysis, clone-censor-weight method), using surgical resection among women with metastatic breast cancer as an example. All adult women diagnosed with incident metastatic breast cancer from 2013-2016 in the National Cancer Database were included. To quantify immortal time bias, we also conducted a simulation study where the "true" relationship between surgical resection and mortality was known.

Results: 24,329 women (median age 61, IQR 51-71) were included, and 24% underwent surgical resection. The largest association between resection and mortality was observed when using a dichotomized exposure [HR, 0.54; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.51-0.57], followed by dichotomous with exclusion of immortal time (HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.59-0.65). Results from the time-varying exposure, landmark, and clone-censor-weight method analyses were closer to the null (HR, 0.67-0.84). Results from the plasmode simulation found that the time-varying exposure, landmark, and clone-censor-weight method models all produced unbiased HRs (bias -0.003 to 0.016). Both standard dichotomous exposure (HR, 0.84; bias, -0.177) and dichotomous with exclusion of immortal time (HR, 0.93; bias, -0.074) produced meaningfully biased estimates.

Conclusions: Researchers should use time-varying exposures with a treatment assessment window or the clone-censor-weight method when immortal time is present.

Impact: Using methods that appropriately account for immortal time will improve evidence and decision-making from research using real-world data.

Citing Articles

Frailty Trajectories Following Adjuvant Chemotherapy and Mortality in Older Women With Breast Cancer.

Duchesneau E, Kim D, Sturmer T, Her Q, Zhang Z, Pajewski N JAMA Netw Open. 2025; 8(3):e250614.

PMID: 40072432 PMC: 11904708. DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.0614.


A Bayesian framework for causal analysis of recurrent events with timing misalignment.

Oganisian A, Girard A, Steingrimsson J, Moyo P Biometrics. 2024; 80(4).

PMID: 39656742 PMC: 11639529. DOI: 10.1093/biomtc/ujae145.


Receipt of guideline-concordant care and survival among young adult women with non-metastatic breast cancer.

Bhattacharya M, Liu B, Kurian A, Stevens J, Enewold L, Penn D Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2024; .

PMID: 39652290 DOI: 10.1007/s10549-024-07570-w.


De-Mystifying the Clone-Censor-Weight Method for Causal Research Using Observational Data: A Primer for Cancer Researchers.

Gaber C, Ghazarian A, Strassle P, Ribeiro T, Salas M, Maringe C Cancer Med. 2024; 13(23):e70461.

PMID: 39642890 PMC: 11623977. DOI: 10.1002/cam4.70461.


Benefit and risk of oral anticoagulant initiation strategies in patients with atrial fibrillation and cancer: a target trial emulation using the SEER-Medicare database.

Truong B, Hornsby L, Fox B, Chou C, Zheng J, Qian J J Thromb Thrombolysis. 2024; 57(4):638-649.

PMID: 38504063 PMC: 11026243. DOI: 10.1007/s11239-024-02958-3.


References
1.
Suissa S . Immortal time bias in pharmaco-epidemiology. Am J Epidemiol. 2007; 167(4):492-9. DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwm324. View

2.
Khan S, Stewart A, Morrow M . Does aggressive local therapy improve survival in metastatic breast cancer?. Surgery. 2002; 132(4):620-6; discussion 626-7. DOI: 10.1067/msy.2002.127544. View

3.
Thomas A, Khan S, Chrischilles E, Schroeder M . Initial Surgery and Survival in Stage IV Breast Cancer in the United States, 1988-2011. JAMA Surg. 2015; 151(5):424-31. PMC: 5844269. DOI: 10.1001/jamasurg.2015.4539. View

4.
ANDERSON J, Cain K, Gelber R . Analysis of survival by tumor response. J Clin Oncol. 1983; 1(11):710-9. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.1983.1.11.710. View

5.
King T, Lyman J, Gonen M, Voci A, Brot M, Boafo C . Prognostic Impact of 21-Gene Recurrence Score in Patients With Stage IV Breast Cancer: TBCRC 013. J Clin Oncol. 2016; 34(20):2359-65. PMC: 4981976. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2015.63.1960. View