Tests for Comparing Mark-Specific Hazards and Cumulative Incidence Functions

It is of interest in some applications to determine whether there is a relationship between a hazard rate function (or a cumulative incidence function) and a mark variable which is only observed at uncensored failure times. We develop nonparametric tests for this problem when the mark variable is continuous. Tests are developed for the null hypothesis that the mark-specific hazard rate is independent of the mark versus ordered and two-sided alternatives expressed in terms of mark-specific hazard functions and mark-specific cumulative incidence functions. The test statistics are based on functionals of a bivariate test process equal to a weighted average of differences between a Nelson--Aalen-type estimator of the mark-specific cumulative hazard function and a nonparametric estimator of this function under the null hypothesis. The weight function in the test process can be chosen so that the test statistics are asymptotically distribution-free.Asymptotically correct critical values are obtained through a simple simulation procedure. The testing procedures are shown to perform well in numerical studies, and are illustrated with an AIDS clinical trial example. Specifically, the tests are used to assess if the instantaneous or absolute risk of treatment failure depends on the amount of accumulation of drug resistance mutations in a subject's HIV virus. This assessment helps guide development of anti-HIV therapies that surmount the problem of drug resistance.

Error models for microarray intensities

We derive the additive-multiplicative error model for microarray intensities, and describe two applications. For the detection of differentially expressed genes, we obtain a statistic whose variance is approximately independent of the mean intensity. For the post hoc calibration (normalization) of data with respect to experimental factors, we describe a method for parameter estimation.

Model Evaluation Based on the Distribution of Estimated Absolute Prediction Error

The construction of a reliable, practically useful prediction rule for future response is heavily dependent on the "adequacy" of the fitted regression model. In this article, we consider the absolute prediction error, the expected value of the absolute difference between the future and predicted responses, as the model evaluation criterion. This prediction error is easier to interpret than the average squared error and is equivalent to the mis-classification error for the binary outcome. We show that the distributions of the apparent error and its cross-validation counterparts are approximately normal even under a misspecified fitted model. When the prediction rule is "unsmooth", the variance of the above normal distribution can be estimated well via a perturbation-resampling method. We also show how to approximate the distribution of the difference of the estimated prediction errors from two competing models. With two real examples, we demonstrate that the resulting interval estimates for prediction errors provide much more information about model adequacy than the point estimates alone.

Inference on Survival Data with Covariate Measurement Error - An Imputation-based Approach

We propose a new method for fitting proportional hazards models with error-prone covariates. Regression coefficients are estimated by solving an estimating equation that is the average of the partial likelihood scores based on imputed true covariates. For the purpose of imputation, a linear spline model is assumed on the baseline hazard. We discuss consistency and asymptotic normality of the resulting estimators, and propose a stochastic approximation scheme to obtain the estimates. The algorithm is easy to implement, and reduces to the ordinary Cox partial likelihood approach when the measurement error has a degenerative distribution. Simulations indicate high efficiency and robustness. We consider the special case where error-prone replicates are available on the unobserved true covariates. As expected, increasing the number of replicate for the unobserved covariates increases efficiency and reduces bias. We illustrate the practical utility of the proposed method with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group clinical trial where a genetic marker, c-myc expression level, is subject to measurement error.