Advances and Applications in Statistics

The Advances and Applications in Statistics is an internationally recognized journal indexed in the Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI). It provides a platform for original research papers and survey articles in all areas of statistics, both computational and experimental in nature.

Submit Article

LOSS TO FOLLOW-UP WEIGHTED ESTIMATION METHOD FOR SURVIVAL ANALYSIS

Authors

  • K. M. Jagathnath Krishna Krishna
  • Akash Hari
  • T. Traison
  • Preethi Sara George
  • Aleyamma Mathew

Keywords:

Kaplan-Meier method, loss to follow-up, weighted Kaplan-Meier method, maximum likelihood estimation, censored data, breast and cervix-uteri cancer data, R program

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.17654/0972361723010

Abstract

In survival studies, patient’s information may loss during the follow-up period and hence results in biased survival probabilities. Hence, in the present study, loss to follow-up weighted Kaplan-Meier (LFUWKM) method was derived to reduce such bias. The LFUWKM formed as generalization of the Kaplan-Meier (K-M) method provides reliable estimates when the LFU proportion is high. The variance, 95% CI, efficiency, uniform consistency and maximum likelihood estimate of the LFUWKM method were obtained. Simulation study for varied sample sizes was done for different parametric values and comparison of K-M and other weighted K-M methods (LFUWKM, weighted K-M (WKM) and empirical weighted K-M (EWKM)) were done using root mean square error (RMSE). The simulation study observed that all the methods are equally efficient for survival data with low censoring rate and high follow-up proportion. When 50% of the cases were censored, for small sample size, LFUWKM showed the least RMSE followed by K-M method for data with sufficient follow-up and WKM for follow-up < 80%. For large sample, the same trend was followed with WKM and EWKM with minor variations. For higher censoring rate of 70%, LFUWKM has the least RMSE followed by EWKM irrespective of sample size. Further the advantage of LFUWKM was illustrated using breast and cervix-uteri cancer patient data and the better model was identified based on absolute percentage variation. From both simulation and data analysis using R program, we recommend to use LFUWKM method to get a reliable survival estimate in the presence of high censoring, lower follow-up proportion and smaller sample size.

Received: November 18, 2022; Revised: December 12, 2022; Accepted: December 30, 2022; Published: January 17, 2023

References

E. L. Kaplan and P. Meier, Nonparametric estimation from incomplete observations, J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 53(282) (1958), 457-481.

L. J. Stalpers and E. L. Kaplan, Edward L. Kaplan and the Kaplan-Meier survival curve, BSHM Bull. 33(2) (2018), 109-135.

D. G. Altman, Analysis of survival times, Practical Statistics for Medical Research, Chapman and Hall, London (UK), 1992, pp. 365-393.

J. P. Klein and M. L. Moeschberger, Survival Analysis: Techniques for Censored and Truncated Data, Springer, 2nd ed., 2003.

B. Jan, S. W. A. Shah, S. Shah and M. F. Quadir, Weighted Kaplan-Meier estimation of survival function in heavy censoring, Pakistan J. Statist. 21(1) (2005), 55-63.

M. L. Huang, A weighted estimation method for survival function, Appl. Math. Sci. 2(16) (2008), 753-762.

M. Shafiq and S. Shah, Modified weighted Kaplan-Meier estimator, Pak. J. Stat. Oper. Res. 3(1) (2007), 39-44.

S. R. Cole and M. A. Hernán, Adjusted survival curves with inverse probability weights, Comput. Methods Programs Biomed. 75(1) (2004), 45-49.

S. Miyahara and A. S. Wahed, Weighted Kaplan-Meier estimators for two-stage treatment regimes, Statist. Med. 29 (2010), 2581-2591.

A. Zare, M. Mahmoodi, K. Mohammad, H. Zeraati, M. Hosseini and K. Holakouie, A comparison between Kaplan-Meier and weighted Kaplan-Meier methods of five year survival estimation of patients with gastric cancer, Acta. Med. Iran. 52(10) (2014), 764-767.

K. Shoaiba, A. Hamdib and A. Ahmed, A compression of Kaplan-Meier vs. weighted Kaplan-Meier in comparing estimation of heavy censoring data, Am. Sci. Res. J. Engg. Tech. Sci. (ASRJETS) 36(1) (2017), 211-223.

M. Greenwood, The natural duration of cancer, Reports on Public Health and Medical Subjects, HMSO, London, 1926, pp. 1-26.

D. A. N. Njomen and J. W. Ngatchou, Consistency of the Kaplan-Meier estimator of the survival function in competing risks, The Open Stat. & Prob. J. 9 (2018), 1-17.

T. R. Fleming and D. P. Harrington, Counting Process and Survival Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, Inc, New York, 1991.

B. Ganesh, Effect of loss to follow-up in estimating survival rates, Acta Universitatis Tamperensis, Series A, University of Tampere, Tampere, Vol. 440, 1995.

A. Mathew, Removing bias in cancer survival estimates by active follow-up and information on determinants of loss to follow-up, Acta Universitatis Tamperensis, Series A, Vol. 525, University of Tampere, Tampere, 1996.

V. Kristman, M. Manno and P. Côté, Loss to follow-up in cohort studies: how much is too much, Eur. J. Epidemiol. 19(8) (2004), 751-760.

K. M. J. Krishna, A. Mathew and P. S. George, Cancer survival estimates due to non-uniform loss to follow-up and non-proportional hazards, Asian Pac. J. Cancer Prev. 18(6) (2017), 1493-1497.

J. M. Robins and D. M. Finkelstein, Correcting for noncompliance and dependent censoring in an AIDS clinical trial with inverse probability of censoring weighted (IPCW) log-rank tests, Biometrics 56 (2000), 779-788.

J. Xie and C. Liu, Adjusted Kaplan-Meier estimator and log-rank test with inverse probability of treatment weighting for survival data, Stat. Med. 24 (2005), 3089-3110.

Published

24-09-2025

Issue

Section

Articles

How to Cite

LOSS TO FOLLOW-UP WEIGHTED ESTIMATION METHOD FOR SURVIVAL ANALYSIS. (2025). Advances and Applications in Statistics , 85, 55-78. https://doi.org/10.17654/0972361723010

Similar Articles

1-10 of 256

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.