Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Survival data with multiple outcomes are frequently encountered in biomedical investigations. An illustrative example comes from Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative study where the cognitively normal subjects may clinically progress to mild cognitive impairment and/or Alzheimer’s disease dementia. Transition time from normal cognition to mild cognitive impairment and that from mild cognitive impairment to Alzheimer’s disease are expected to be correlated within subjects and the dependence is often accommodated by the frailty (random effects). Estimation in the frailty model unavoidably involves multiple integrations which may be intractable and hence leads to severe computational challenges, especially in the presence of high-dimensional covariates. In this paper, we propose efficient minorization–maximization algorithms in the frailty model for survival data with multiple outcomes. The alternating direction method of multipliers is further incorporated for simultaneous variable selection and homogeneity pursuit via regularization and fusion. Extensive simulation studies are conducted to assess the performance of the proposed algorithms. An application to the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative data is also provided to illustrate their practical utilities.

Keywords

Alternating direction method of multipliers Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative homogeneity pursuit minorization–maximization algorithm sparsity the frailty model

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Ferri

Prince

Brayne

, et al. Global prevalence of dementia: a Delphi consensus study. The Lancet 2005; 366: 2112–2117.

Petersen

. Mild cognitive impairment as a diagnostic entity. J Intern Med 2004; 256: 183–194.

Ringman

Goate

Masters

, et al. Genetic heterogeneity in Alzheimer disease and implications for treatment strategies. Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep 2014; 14: 499.

Clayton

. A model for association in bivariate life tables and its application in epidemiological studies of familial tendency in chronic disease incidence. Biometrika 1978; 65: 141–151.

Clayton

Cuzick

. Multivariate generalizations of the proportional hazards model. J R Stat Soc: Ser A (General) 1985; 148: 82–117.

Oakes

. Bivariate survival models induced by frailties. J Am Stat Assoc 1989; 84: 487–493.

Zeng

Chen

Ibrahim

. Gamma frailty transformation models for multivariate survival times. Biometrika 2009; 96: 277–291.

Do Ha

Jeong

J-H

Lee

. Statistical modelling of survival data with random effects. Singapore: Springer, 2017.

Do Ha

Noh

Lee

. frailtyhl: A package for fitting frailty models with h-likelihood. R J 2012; 4: 28–37.

10.

Ha Il

Pan

, et al. Variable selection in general frailty models using penalized h-likelihood. J Comput Graph Stat 2014; 23: 1044–1060.

11.

Rondeau

Marzroui

Gonzalez

. frailtypack: an r package for the analysis of correlated survival data with frailty models using penalized likelihood estimation or parametrical estimation. J Stat Softw 2012; 47: 1–28.

12.

Aalen

. Modelling heterogeneity in survival analysis by the compound poisson distribution. Ann Appl Probab 1992; 2: 951–972.

13.

Duchateau

Janssen

. The frailty model. New York: Springer Verlag, 2008.

14.

Hougaard

. Survival models for heterogeneous populations derived from stable distributions. Biometrika 1986; 73: 387–396.

15.

Andersen

Klein

Knudsen

, et al. Estimation of variance in Cox’s regression model with shared gamma frailties. Biometrics 1997; 53: 1475–1484.

16.

Klein

. Semiparametric estimation of random effects using the Cox model based on the EM algorithm. Biometrics 1992; 48: 795–806.

17.

Nielsen

Gill

Andersen

, et al. A counting process approach to maximum likelihood estimation in frailty models. Scand J Stat 1992; 19: 25–43.

18.

Fan

. Homogeneity in regression. J Am Stat Assiciation 2015; 110: 175–194.

19.

Yang

Yuan

Lai

, et al. Feature grouping and selection over an undirected graph. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining, pages 922–930, 2012.

20.

Zhu

Shen

Pan

. Simultaneous grouping pursuit and feature selection over an undirected graph. J Am Stat Assoc 2013; 108: 713–725.

21.

Becker

Yang

Lange

. EM algorithms without missing data. Stat Methods Med Res 1997; 6: 38–54.

22.

Hunter

Lange

. A tutorial on MM algorithms. Am Stat 2004; 58: 30–37.

23.

Lange

Hunter

Yang

. Optimization transfer using surrogate objective functions. J Comput Graph Stat 2000; 9: 1–20.

24.

Fan

. Variable selection via nonconcave penalized likelihood and its oracle properties. J Am Stat Assoc 2001; 96: 1348–1360.

25.

Zhang

, et al. Nearly unbiased variable selection under minimax concave penalty. Ann Stat 2010; 38: 894–942.

26.

Tibshirani

. The lasso method for variable selection in the cox model. Stat Med 1997; 16: 385–395.

27.

Utazirubanda

M León

Ngom

. Variable selection with group lasso approach: Application to cox regression with frailty model. Commun Stat-Simul Comput 2021; 50: 881–901.

28.

Groll

Hastie

Tutz

. Selection of effects in cox frailty models by regularization methods. Biometrics 2017; 73: 846–856.

29.

Boyd

Parikh

Chu

. Distributed optimization and statistical learning via the alternating direction method of multipliers. Found Trends Mach Learn 2011; 3: 1–122.

30.

Chi

Lange

. Splitting methods for convex clustering. J Comput Graph Stat 2015; 24: 994–1013.

31.

Huang

Tian

. On profile MM algorithms for gamma frailty survival models. Stat Sin 2019; 29: 895–916.

32.

Johansen

. An extension of cox’s regression model. International Statistical Review/Revue Internationale de Statistique 1983; 51: 165–174.

33.

Vaida

. Parameter convergence for em and mm algorithms. Stat Sin 2005; 15: 831–840.

34.

Lange

Zhou

. MM algorithms for geometric and signomial programming. Math Program 2014; 143: 339–356.

35.

Hunter

. Variable selection using MM algorithms. Ann Stat 2005; 33: 1617–1642.

36.

Schwarz

, et al. Estimating the dimension of a model. Ann Stat 1978; 6: 461–464.

37.

Graven

. Smoothing noisy data with spline function: estimating the correct degree of smoothing by the method of generalized cross-validaton. Number Math 1989; 31: 377–403.

38.

Huang

. A concave pairwise fusion approach to subgroup analysis. J Am Stat Assoc 2017; 112: 410–423.

39.

Friedman

Hastie

Tibshirani

. Regularization paths for generalized linear models via coordinate descent. J Stat Softw 2010; 33: 1.

40.

Fan

. Variable selection for cox’s proportional hazards model and frailty model. Ann Stat 2002; 30: 74–99.

41.

Varadhan

Roland

. Simple and globally convergent methods for accelerating the convergence of any EM algorithm. Scand J Stat 2008; 35: 335–353.

42.

Zhou

Alexander

Lange

. A quasi-newton acceleration for high-dimensional optimization algorithms. Stat Comput 2011; 21: 261–273.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.13 MB

Efficient algorithms for survival data with multiple outcomes using the frailty model

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material