IOVS
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

(Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science. 2003;44:3288-3293.)
© 2003 by The Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology, Inc.
DOI:  10.1167/iovs.02-1328
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kivelä, T.
Right arrow Articles by Grambsch, P. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Kivelä, T.
Right arrow Articles by Grambsch, P. M.

Evaluation of Sampling Strategies for Modeling Survival of Uveal Malignant Melanoma

Tero Kivelä1 and Patricia M. Grambsch2

1From the Ocular Oncology Service, Department of Ophthalmology, Helsinki University Central Hospital, Helsinki, Finland; and the 2Division of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota.

PURPOSE. To evaluate sampling strategies used to estimate survival after uveal malignant melanoma that exclude some patients who would be censored from the analysis.

METHODS. Simulation was performed on a population-based data set of 133 patients who had an eye enucleated because of uveal melanoma. One thousand bootstrap samples of 80 patients were drawn, without replacement, according to three sampling strategies: a random draw (conventional strategy), a draw limited to patients who died of the tumor or survived at least 10 years without metastasis ("late-censoring" strategy), and a draw modified so that 40 patients died of melanoma and others survived at least 10 years without metastasis ("fifty-fifty" strategy). The bias in the Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox proportional hazards regression was quantified.

RESULTS. The late-censoring strategy decreased the proportion of censored patients from 53% to 42%, whereas the fifty-fifty strategy assigned 50% of patients to this group. The former strategy overestimated mortality, the excess being 5.2% and 3.7% at 10 and 20 years, respectively. The latter strategy underestimated mortality, the bias being 1.6% and 4.6% at 10 and 20 years, respectively. The bias differed according to categories of explanatory variables so that the log-rank test statistic was inflated a median of 1.08 times (range, 0.73–1.87) and 1.14 times (range, 0.87–1.84), and the Wald {chi}2 statistic of the Cox regression was inflated a median of 1.18 times (range, 0.79–2.13) and 1.16 times (range, 0.71–2.02), respectively, when the late-censoring and fifty-fifty strategies were applied.

CONCLUSIONS. Sampling strategies that exclude on purpose a proportion of patients who would be censored produce biased statistics, because they violate assumptions of survival analysis. Only random sampling from an underlying population produces unbiased survival estimates.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Age AgeingHome page
S. Lopez-Pousa, J. Garre-Olmo, and J. Vilalta-Franch
Reply
Age Ageing, March 1, 2007; 36(2): 235 - 235.
[Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2003 by the Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology