The largest database of trusted experimental protocols

13 protocols using survival

1

Survival Analysis of Cancer Patients

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Data were collected using SEER*Stat Software (version 8.3.6, https://seer.cancer.gov/seerstat/). All statistical analyses were performed in R software (version 3.6.1, http://www.r-project.org) with the R package as the following: survival (survival">http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=survival), plyr (http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=plyr), rms (http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=rms), cmprsk (http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=cmprsk), mstate(http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=plyr), ggplot2 (ggplot2">http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=ggplot2), nomogramEx (http://CRAN.R-project.org/package= nomogramEx).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
2

Survival Analysis of Downstaging in Cancer

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Categorical variables were compared using the chi-squared test. Non-normally distributed data were analysed using the Mann–Whitney U test. Comparisons were made for the main explanatory variable, namely the extent of downstaging (that is upstaged, no change, or downstaged by one stage, two stages, or three or more stages). survival was estimated using Kaplan–Meier survival curves and compared using the log rank test. Multivariable analyses used Cox proportional hazards models to adjust for clinically relevant variables to produce adjusted HR and 95 per cent confidence intervals. P < 0.050 was considered to be statistically significant. Data analysis was performed using R Foundation Statistical Software (R 3.2.2) with the TableOne, ggplot2, Hmisc, Matchit, and survival packages (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria) as previously described10 ,11 (link). This study was exempt from Institutional Review Board approval.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
3

Statistical Methods for Survival Analysis

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Categorical variables were compared using the Kruskal–Wallis test, and non-normally distributed data were analyzed using the Mann–Whitney U test. survival was estimated using Kaplan–Meier survival curves and compared using the log-rank test. A p-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Data analysis was performed using R Foundation Statistical software (R 3.2.2) with TableOne, ggplot2, Hmisc, and survival packages (The R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria) as previously described.19 (link),25 (link),26 (link)
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
4

Examining Vaccine Effectiveness and Risk Factors

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Date of full vaccination was defined as 14 days after (1) a single Janssen vaccine, (2) the second Moderna vaccine dose, or (3) the second Pfizer vaccine dose. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to estimate univariate hazard ratios (HRs) and multivariable HRs in a model including the following features: age (categorized), sex (male and female), vaccine type, Elixhauser comorbidities (encoded as independent binary variables), and SARS-CoV-2 infection prior to the first dose of vaccination (yes or no). We remove the negligible number of individuals with sex=unknown. We also model interactions between vaccine type and all other covariates as well as previous infection and all other covariates but find that none were statistically significant. Further, the interaction terms had a negligible impact on the hazard ratios of the other terms and were thus removed for greater clarity in the results. All analyses were performed using the “coxph” function from the R package “survival” (R Foundation for Statistical Computing) [21 ].
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
5

Survival Analysis of Research Cohorts

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Kaplan–Meier analysis was used to estimate the survival functions, and log-rank test to determine the difference of survival curve between groups. A P-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant. All these survival analyses were conducted in software R (Version 3.3.3, The R Foundation, Vienna, Austria) with survival package (Version 2.41-3; survival/index.html">https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/survival/index.html).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
6

Esophageal Cancer Survival Analysis

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Categorical variables were compared using the Chi-square test; non-normally distributed data were analyzed using the Mann–Whitney U test; survival was estimated using Kaplan–Meier survival curves and compared using the log-rank test; and multivariable analyses used Cox proportional hazards models. A subset analysis in patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy prior to esophagectomy were analyzed. A p value < 0.05 was considered to be statistically significant. Data analysis was performed using R Foundation Statistical software (R 3.2.2) with TableOne, ggplot2, Hmisc, Matchit and survival packages (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria) as previously described.18 (link),19 (link)
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
7

PD Subtype Differences in Clinical Milestones

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
To determine PD subtype differences in clinical milestones (DBS, dementia, mortality), multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression models using the longitudinal follow‐up data were conducted, with censoring based on last date of contact. SURVIVAL and events were calculated as such for each milestone: for DBS, events were defined as date of DBS and SURVIVAL time was calculated as time since baseline visit to most recent contact; for dementia, events were defined as the date when a participant received a CDR score ≥1, and SURVIVAL time was calculated as time since baseline visit to most recent CDR; and for mortality, events were defined as date of death, and SURVIVAL time was calculated as time since baseline to most recent contact. As follow‐up visits may only occur every three years, date of last contact (for the DBS and mortality analyses) was based on most recent contact from either a study visit, study contact, or clinical visit.
LCA was conducted using MPlus (Muthen & Muthen, Los Angeles CA). The longitudinal SURVIVAL analyses (Cox proportional hazards regression) were conducted in R Version 3.5.2, SURVIVAL and SURVMINER packages (R Foundation, Vienna Austria). Additional analyses were conducted with PASW Version 25 (IBM, Chicago, IL). All tests were 2‐tailed and P < 0.05 defined statistical significance.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
8

Analyzing Survival in Cancer Patients

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Categorical variables were compared using the Chi squared test. Non-normally distributed data were analyzed using the Mann–Whitney U test. survival was estimated using Kaplan–Meier survival curves and compared using the log-rank test. Multivariable analyses used Cox proportional hazards models. Stratified survival analyses by underlying histology (adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma) and by response to neoadjuvant therapy classification were performed. Analyses were also performed according to degree of downstaging (> 3 stages, 3 stages, 2 stages, and 1 stage). A p value of < 0.05 was considered to be statistically significant. Data analysis was performed using R Foundation Statistical software (R 3.2.2) with TableOne, ggplot2, Hmisc, Matchit, and survival packages (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria) as previously described.17
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
9

Multivariate Cox Regression Analysis

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
To compare baseline characteristics, we used the chi-squared test and the Kruskal–Wallis test. Continuous and categorical variables were presented as median values with interquartile ranges and numbers with percentages, respectively. The all-cause mortality risks were estimated by multivariate Cox regression analysis adjusted for variables including age, sex, body mass index (BMI), smoking status, drinking status, serum glucose, systolic blood pressure and total cholesterol. To allow the modeling of smooth non-linear effects, we used penalized splines implemented in the spline function of the R package ‘survival’ (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria). We performed the statistical analysis using SAS version 9.4 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA) with a two-sided P-value <0.05 as the criterion for statistical significance.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
10

Survival Analysis of Disease Outcomes

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Categorical variables were compared using the Chi square test, and non-normally distributed data were analyzed using the Mann–Whitney U test. survival was estimated using Kaplan–Meier survival curves and compared using the log-rank test. Multivariable analyses used Cox proportional hazards models (“Appendix 1”). A comparison of outcomes between 5-year periods (1989–1993, 1994–1998, 1999–2003, 2004–2008, 2009–2013, 2014–2018) was also performed. For the final cohort, patients were included up to January 2017 to allow for a minimum 3 years of follow-up. A p value < 0.05 was considered to be statistically significant. Data analysis was performed using R Foundation Statistical software (R 3.2.2) with TableOne, ggplot2, Hmisc, Matchit and survival packages (The R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria), as previously reported.
As a review of past practice and outcomes, this study was deemed exempt from the need for ethical approval.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand

About PubCompare

Our mission is to provide scientists with the largest repository of trustworthy protocols and intelligent analytical tools, thereby offering them extensive information to design robust protocols aimed at minimizing the risk of failures.

We believe that the most crucial aspect is to grant scientists access to a wide range of reliable sources and new useful tools that surpass human capabilities.

However, we trust in allowing scientists to determine how to construct their own protocols based on this information, as they are the experts in their field.

Ready to get started?

Sign up for free.
Registration takes 20 seconds.
Available from any computer
No download required

Sign up now

Revolutionizing how scientists
search and build protocols!