Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25503256›Full record

ArticlePloS one2014

Should we use standard survival models or the illness-death model for interval-censored data to investigate risk factors of chronic kidney disease progression?

Julie Boucquemont, Marie Metzger, Christian Combe, Bénédicte Stengel, Karen Leffondre, NephroTest Study Group

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 34% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Combined effects of blood pressure and glucose status on the risk of chronic kidney disease.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2024
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Julie BoucquemontUniversity of Bordeaux, ISPED, Centre INSERM U897 Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Bordeaux, France.
Marie MetzgerInserm Unit 1018, CESP, Research Centre in Epidemiology and Population Health, Villejuif, France; University Paris-Sud 11, UMRS 1018, Villejuif, France.
Christian CombeCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Bordeaux, Service de Néphrologie Transplantation Dialyse, Bordeaux, France; Unité INSERM 1026, Univ. Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France.
Bénédicte StengelInserm Unit 1018, CESP, Research Centre in Epidemiology and Population Health, Villejuif, France; University Paris-Sud 11, UMRS 1018, Villejuif, France.
Karen LeffondreUniversity of Bordeaux, ISPED, Centre INSERM U897 Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Bordeaux, France.
NephroTest Study Group
Université de Bordeaux · FRUniversité Paris-Sud · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn studies investigating risk factors of chronic kidney disease (CKD) progression, one may be interested in estimating factors effects on both a fall of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) below a specific level (i.e., a CKD stage) and death. Such studies have to account for the fact that GFR is measured at intermittent visit only, which implies that progression to the stage of interest is unknown for patients who die before being observed at that stage. Our objective was to compare the results of an illness-death model that handles this uncertainty, with frequently used survival models.

methodsThis study included 1,519 patients from the NephroTest cohort with CKD stages 1-4 at baseline (69% males, 59±15 years, median protein/creatinine ratio [PCR] 27.4 mg/mmol) and subsequent annual measures of GFR (follow-up time 4.3±2.7 years). Each model was used to estimate the effects of sex, age, PCR, and GFR at baseline on the hazards of progression to CKD stage 5 (GFR<15 mL/min/1.73 m2, n = 282 observed) and death (n = 168).

resultsFor progression to stage 5, there were only minor differences between results from the different models. The differences between results were higher for the hazard of death before or after progression. Our results also suggest that previous findings on the effect of age on end-stage renal disease are more likely due to a strong impact of age on death than to an effect on progression. The probabilities of progression were systematically under-estimated with the survival model as compared with the illness-death model.

conclusionsThis study illustrates the advantages of the illness-death model for accurately estimating the effects of risk factors on the hazard of progression and death, and probabilities of progression. It avoids the need to choose arbitrary time-to-event and time-to-censoring, while accounting for both interval censoring and competition by death, using a single analytical model.

Indexed as

Disease ProgressionPrognosisAdultAgedCreatinineDeathFemaleGlomerular Filtration RateHumansKidney TransplantationMaleMiddle AgedRenal Insufficiency, ChronicRisk FactorsSeverity of Illness IndexCreatinine

Identifiers

PMID25503256
PMCPMC4263704
OpenAlexW2013575257

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.