IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0216559.html

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. 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).
    2. 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.
    3. Michael J. Crowther & Keith R. Abrams & Paul C. Lambert, 2013. "Joint modeling of longitudinal and survival data," Stata Journal, StataCorp LLC, vol. 13(1), pages 165-184, March.
    4. Yixiu Liu & Mahmoud Torabi & Xuekui Zhang & Depeng Jiang, 2025. "Improved joint modeling of longitudinal and survival data using a poisson regression approach," Statistical Methods & Applications, Springer;Società Italiana di Statistica, vol. 34(2), pages 325-344, May.
    5. 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.
    6. Jeong, Cheoljoon & Yue, Xubo & Chung, Seokhyun, 2026. "Fed-Joint: Joint modeling of nonlinear degradation signals and failure events for remaining useful life prediction using federated learning," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 267(PA).
    7. 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).
    8. 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.
    9. Medina-Olivares, Victor & Calabrese, Raffaella & Crook, Jonathan & Lindgren, Finn, 2023. "Joint models for longitudinal and discrete survival data in credit scoring," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 307(3), pages 1457-1473.
    10. Hanze Zhang & Yangxin Huang, 2020. "Quantile regression-based Bayesian joint modeling analysis of longitudinal–survival data, with application to an AIDS cohort study," Lifetime Data Analysis: An International Journal Devoted to Statistical Methods and Applications for Time-to-Event Data, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 339-368, April.
    11. Jiehuan Sun & Jose D. Herazo‐Maya & Philip L. Molyneaux & Toby M. Maher & Naftali Kaminski & Hongyu Zhao, 2019. "Regularized Latent Class Model for Joint Analysis of High‐Dimensional Longitudinal Biomarkers and a Time‐to‐Event Outcome," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 75(1), pages 69-77, March.
    12. Srijan Chattopadhyay & Sevantee Basu & Swapnaneel Bhattacharyya & Manash Pratim Gogoi & Kiranmoy Das, 2025. "Simultaneous clustering and joint modeling of multivariate binary longitudinal and time-to-event data," Lifetime Data Analysis: An International Journal Devoted to Statistical Methods and Applications for Time-to-Event Data, Springer, vol. 31(4), pages 830-851, October.
    13. Khurshid Alam & Arnab Maity & Sanjoy K. Sinha & Dimitris Rizopoulos & Abdus Sattar, 2021. "Joint modeling of longitudinal continuous, longitudinal ordinal, and time-to-event outcomes," Lifetime Data Analysis: An International Journal Devoted to Statistical Methods and Applications for Time-to-Event Data, Springer, vol. 27(1), pages 64-90, January.
    14. Abhisek Saha & Ling Ma & Animikh Biswas & Rajeshwari Sundaram, 2024. "Joint Modeling of Geometric Features of Longitudinal Process and Discrete Survival Time Measured on Nested Timescales: An Application to Fecundity Studies," Statistics in Biosciences, Springer;International Chinese Statistical Association, vol. 16(1), pages 86-106, April.
    15. Liu, Yue & Liu, Lei & Zhou, Jianhui, 2015. "Joint latent class model of survival and longitudinal data: An application to CPCRA study," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 40-50.
    16. Giulia Barbati & Alessio Farcomeni, 2018. "Prognostic assessment of repeatedly measured time-dependent biomarkers, with application to dilated cardiomyopathy," Statistical Methods & Applications, Springer;Società Italiana di Statistica, vol. 27(3), pages 545-557, August.
    17. M. H. Hof & J. Z. Musoro & R. B. Geskus & G. H. Struijk & I. J. M. ten Berge & A. H. Zwinderman, 2017. "Simulated maximum likelihood estimation in joint models for multiple longitudinal markers and recurrent events of multiple types, in the presence of a terminal event," Journal of Applied Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(15), pages 2756-2777, November.
    18. Jahani, Salman & Zhou, Shiyu & Veeramani, Dharmaraj, 2021. "Stochastic prognostics under multiple time-varying environmental factors," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 215(C).
    19. 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.
    20. 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).

    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.