A Bayesian approach to mixture cure models with spatial frailties for population‐based cancer relative survival data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract As the treatments of cancer progress, a certain number of cancers are curable if diagnosed early. In population‐based cancer survival studies, cure is said to occur when mortality rate of the cancer patients returns to the same level as that expected for the general cancer‐free population. The estimates of cure fraction are of interest to both cancer patients and health policy makers. Mixture cure models have been widely used because the model is easy to interpret by separating the patients into two distinct groups. Usually parametric models are assumed for the latent distribution for the uncured patients. The estimation of cure fraction from the mixture cure model may be sensitive to misspecification of latent distribution. We propose a Bayesian approach to mixture cure model for population‐based cancer survival data, which can be extended to county‐level cancer survival data. Instead of modeling the latent distribution by a fixed parametric distribution, we use a finite mixture of the union of the lognormal, loglogistic, and Weibull distributions. The parameters are estimated using the Markov chain Monte Carlo method. Simulation study shows that the Bayesian method using a finite mixture latent distribution provides robust inference of parameter estimates. The proposed Bayesian method is applied to relative survival data for colon cancer patients from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program to estimate the cure fractions. The Canadian Journal of Statistics 40: 40–54; 2012 © 2012 Statistical Society of Canada
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".