IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0216559.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Predicting kidney failure from longitudinal kidney function trajectory: A comparison of models

Author

Listed:
  • Jan A J G van den Brand
  • Tjeerd M H Dijkstra
  • Jack Wetzels
  • Bénédicte Stengel
  • Marie Metzger
  • Peter J Blankestijn
  • Hiddo J Lambers Heerspink
  • Ron T Gansevoort

Abstract

Rationale & objective: Early prediction of chronic kidney disease (CKD) progression to end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) currently use Cox models including baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) only. Alternative approaches include a Cox model that includes eGFR slope determined over a baseline period of time, a Cox model with time varying GFR, or a joint modeling approach. We studied if these more complex approaches may further improve ESKD prediction. Study design: Prospective cohort. Setting & participants: We re-used data from two CKD cohorts including patients with baseline eGFR >30ml/min per 1.73m2. MASTERPLAN (N = 505; 55 ESKD events) was used as development dataset, and NephroTest (N = 1385; 72 events) for validation. Predictors: All models included age, sex, eGFR, and albuminuria, known prognostic markers for ESKD. Analytical approach: We trained the models on the MASTERPLAN data and determined discrimination and calibration for each model at 2 years follow-up for a prediction horizon of 2 years in the NephroTest cohort. We benchmarked the predictive performance against the Kidney Failure Risk Equation (KFRE). Results: The C-statistics for the KFRE was 0.94 (95%CI 0.86 to 1.01). Performance was similar for the Cox model with time-varying eGFR (0.92 [0.84 to 0.97]), eGFR (0.95 [0.90 to 1.00]), and the joint model 0.91 [0.87 to 0.96]). The Cox model with eGFR slope showed the best calibration. Conclusion: In the present studies, where the outcome was rare and follow-up data was highly complete, the joint models did not offer improvement in predictive performance over more traditional approaches such as a survival model with time-varying eGFR, or a model with eGFR slope.

Suggested Citation

  • Jan A J G van den Brand & Tjeerd M H Dijkstra & Jack Wetzels & Bénédicte Stengel & Marie Metzger & Peter J Blankestijn & Hiddo J Lambers Heerspink & Ron T Gansevoort, 2019. "Predicting kidney failure from longitudinal kidney function trajectory: A comparison of models," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(5), pages 1-13, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0216559
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0216559
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0216559
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0216559&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0216559?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dimitris Rizopoulos, 2011. "Dynamic Predictions and Prospective Accuracy in Joint Models for Longitudinal and Time-to-Event Data," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 67(3), pages 819-829, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jahani, Salman & Zhou, Shiyu & Veeramani, Dharmaraj, 2021. "Stochastic prognostics under multiple time-varying environmental factors," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 215(C).
    2. Zhang, Zili & Charalambous, Christiana & Foster, Peter, 2023. "A Gaussian copula joint model for longitudinal and time-to-event data with random effects," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    3. Li, Kan & Luo, Sheng, 2019. "Bayesian functional joint models for multivariate longitudinal and time-to-event data," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 14-29.
    4. Marlena Maziarz & Patrick Heagerty & Tianxi Cai & Yingye Zheng, 2017. "On longitudinal prediction with time-to-event outcome: Comparison of modeling options," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 73(1), pages 83-93, March.
    5. Rizopoulos, Dimitris, 2016. "The R Package JMbayes for Fitting Joint Models for Longitudinal and Time-to-Event Data Using MCMC," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 72(i07).
    6. Eleni†Rosalina Andrinopoulou & Paul H. C. Eilers & Johanna J. M. Takkenberg & Dimitris Rizopoulos, 2018. "Improved dynamic predictions from joint models of longitudinal and survival data with time†varying effects using P†splines," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 74(2), pages 685-693, June.
    7. Michael J. Crowther & Keith R. Abrams & Paul C. Lambert, 2013. "Joint modeling of longitudinal and survival data," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 13(1), pages 165-184, March.
    8. Carles Serrat & Montserrat Ru� & Carmen Armero & Xavier Piulachs & H�ctor Perpi��n & Anabel Forte & �lvaro P�ez & Guadalupe G�mez, 2015. "Frequentist and Bayesian approaches for a joint model for prostate cancer risk and longitudinal prostate-specific antigen data," Journal of Applied Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(6), pages 1223-1239, June.
    9. Anirudh Tomer & Daan Nieboer & Monique J. Roobol & Ewout W. Steyerberg & Dimitris Rizopoulos, 2019. "Personalized schedules for surveillance of low‐risk prostate cancer patients," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 75(1), pages 153-162, March.
    10. Dimitris Rizopoulos & Laura A. Hatfield & Bradley P. Carlin & Johanna J. M. Takkenberg, 2014. "Combining Dynamic Predictions From Joint Models for Longitudinal and Time-to-Event Data Using Bayesian Model Averaging," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 109(508), pages 1385-1397, December.
    11. Lisa M. McCrink & Adele H. Marshall & Karen J. Cairns, 2013. "Advances in Joint Modelling: A Review of Recent Developments with Application to the Survival of End Stage Renal Disease Patients," International Statistical Review, International Statistical Institute, vol. 81(2), pages 249-269, August.
    12. Qing Liu & Gong Tang & Joseph P. Costantino & Chung‐Chou H. Chang, 2020. "Landmark proportional subdistribution hazards models for dynamic prediction of cumulative incidence functions," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 69(5), pages 1145-1162, November.
    13. Paul Blanche & Cécile Proust-Lima & Lucie Loubère & Claudine Berr & Jean-François Dartigues & Hélène Jacqmin-Gadda, 2015. "Quantifying and comparing dynamic predictive accuracy of joint models for longitudinal marker and time-to-event in presence of censoring and competing risks," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 71(1), pages 102-113, March.
    14. Kamaryn T. Tanner & Linda D. Sharples & Rhian M. Daniel & Ruth H. Keogh, 2021. "Dynamic survival prediction combining landmarking with a machine learning ensemble: Methodology and empirical comparison," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 184(1), pages 3-30, January.
    15. Zhang, Cuihong & Ning, Jing & Cai, Jianwen & Squires, James E. & Belle, Steven H. & Li, Ruosha, 2024. "Dynamic risk score modeling for multiple longitudinal risk factors and survival," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    16. Liang Li & Sheng Luo & Bo Hu & Tom Greene, 2017. "Dynamic Prediction of Renal Failure Using Longitudinal Biomarkers in a Cohort Study of Chronic Kidney Disease," Statistics in Biosciences, Springer;International Chinese Statistical Association, vol. 9(2), pages 357-378, December.
    17. Jeremy M. G. Taylor & Yongseok Park & Donna P. Ankerst & Cecile Proust-Lima & Scott Williams & Larry Kestin & Kyoungwha Bae & Tom Pickles & Howard Sandler, 2013. "Real-Time Individual Predictions of Prostate Cancer Recurrence Using Joint Models," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 69(1), pages 206-213, March.
    18. Jiin Choi & Stewart J. Anderson & Thomas J. Richards & Wesley K. Thompson, 2014. "Prediction of transplant-free survival in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis patients using joint models for event times and mixed multivariate longitudinal data," Journal of Applied Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(10), pages 2192-2205, October.
    19. van Geloven, N. & He, Y. & Zwinderman, A.H. & Putter, H., 2021. "Estimation of incident dynamic AUC in practice," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    20. Xavier Piulachs & Ramon Alemany & Montserrat Guillen, 2014. "A joint longitudinal and survival model with health care usage for insured elderly," Working Papers 2014-07, Universitat de Barcelona, UB Riskcenter.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0216559. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.