Analyses of renal outcome following transplantation adjusting for informative right censoring and demographic factors: A longitudinal study

Department of Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC 29425, USA.
Renal Failure (Impact Factor: 0.94). 07/2010; 32(6):691-8. DOI: 10.3109/0886022X.2010.486495
Source: PubMed


Demographic factors such as race, vital status, gender, and age could affect the final renal outcome of patients who undergo renal transplantation. These demographic factors could be assessed at the recipient and donor levels. Repeated measures for blood urea nitrogen (BUN) are typically recorded for each patient following renal transplantation, as a biomarker to assess renal progress. However, once a patient develops renal failure due to graft rejection, no measurement of BUN can be registered and the patient goes back to dialysis. This causes loss of follow-up and incomplete data on BUN measurements, a problem referred to as informative right censoring. If this problem is ignored, inaccurate, and biased estimates will be generated. In this study, unbiased estimates for the rate of change of BUN levels over time adjusted for informative right censoring and demographic factors were acquired using a sophisticated model of analysis. Our results demonstrated that BUN levels for Caucasians were decreasing at a greater rate than African Americans (p < 0.0001). When donors are deceased, African American recipients showed an increase instead of a decrease in their BUN levels following transplantation. Moreover, African Americans showed a decrease in their BUN levels when the donors were African Americans compared with when donors were Caucasians (p = 0.03). Our results also showed that BUN levels were decreasing at a greater rate when donors and recipients were of different gender than when they were of the same gender (p = 0.009). These results suggest that the success of renal transplantation is impacted by the donor/recipient demographic factors.

Download full-text


Available from: Robert F Woolson, Feb 17, 2014
20 Reads
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A new statistical model is proposed to estimate population and individual slopes that are adjusted for covariates and informative right censoring. Individual slopes are assumed to have a mean that depends on the population slope for the covariates. The number of observations for each individual is modeled as a truncated discrete distribution with mean dependent on the individual subjects’ slopes. Our simulation study results indicated that the associated bias and mean squared errors for the proposed model were comparable to those associated with the model that only adjusts for informative right censoring. The proposed model was illustrated using renal transplant dataset to estimate population slopes for covariates that could impact the outcome of renal function following renal transplantation.
    Journal of Applied Statistics 03/2012; 39(3-3):631-642. DOI:10.1080/02664763.2011.610441 · 0.42 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Analysis of multivariate longitudinal data becomes complicated when the outcomes are of high dimension and informative right censoring is prevailing. Here, we propose a likelihood based approach for high dimensional outcomes wherein we jointly model the censoring process along with the slopes of the multivariate outcomes in the same likelihood function. We utilized pseudo likelihood function to generate parameter estimates for the population slopes and Empirical Bayes estimates for the individual slopes. The proposed approach was applied to jointly model longitudinal measures of blood urea nitrogen, plasma creatinine, and estimated glomerular filtration rate which are key markers of kidney function in a cohort of renal transplant patients followed from kidney transplant to kidney failure. Feasibility of the proposed joint model for high dimensional multivariate outcomes was successfully demonstrated and its performance was compared to that of a pairwise bivariate model. Our simulation study results suggested that there was a significant reduction in bias and mean squared errors associated with the joint model compared to the pairwise bivariate model.
    08/2014; 5(4). DOI:10.4172/2155-6180.1000203