Abstract:Background: Evidence-based treatment decisions in medicine are made founded on population-level evidence obtained during randomized clinical trials. In an era of personalized medicine, these decisions should be based on the predicted benefit of a treatment on a patient-level. Survival prediction models play a central role as they incorporate the time-to-event and censoring. In medical applications uncertainty is critical especially when treatments differ in their side effect profiles or costs. Additionally, models must be adapted to local populations without diminishing performance and often without the original training data available due to privacy concern. Both points are supported by Bayesian models-yet they are rarely used. The aim of this work is to evaluate Bayesian parametric survival models on public datasets including cardiology, infectious diseases, and oncology. Materials and methods: Bayesian parametric survival models based on the Exponential and Weibull distribution were implemented as a Python package. A linear combination and a neural network were used for predicting the parameters of the distributions. A superiority design was used to assess whether Bayesian models are better than commonly used models such as Cox Proportional Hazards, Random Survival Forest, and Neural Network-based Cox Proportional Hazards. In a secondary analysis, overfitting was compared between these models. An equivalence design was used to assess whether the prediction performance of Bayesian models after model updating using Bayes rule is equivalent to retraining on the full dataset. Results: In this study, we found that Bayesian parametric survival models perform as good as state-of-the art models while requiring less hyperparameters to be tuned and providing a measure of the uncertainty of the predictions. In addition, these models were less prone to overfitting. Furthermore, we show that updating these models using Bayes rule yields equivalent performance compared to models trained on combined original and new datasets. Conclusions: Bayesian parametric survival models are non-inferior to conventional survival models while requiring less hyperparameter tuning, being less prone to overfitting, and allowing model updating using Bayes rule. Further, the Bayesian models provide a measure of the uncertainty on the statistical inference, and, in particular, on the prediction.

Assessing survival models by interval testing

Overview of model validation for survival regression model with competing risks using melanoma study data

Parametric Regression Model for Survival Data: Weibull Regression Model As an Example

An Evaluation of an Algorithm for the Selection of Flexible Survival Models for Cancer Immunotherapies: Pass or Fail?

Bayes Factors for Choosing among Six Common Survival Models.

Informing Structural Assumptions for Three State Oncology Cost-Effectiveness Models through Model Efficiency and Fit

Impact of model misspecification in shared frailty survival models

SurvInt: a simple tool to obtain precise parametric survival extrapolations

A Multi-parameter regression model for interval censored survival data

Optimality of testing procedures for survival data

A tutorial on evaluating time-varying discrimination accuracy for survival models used in dynamic decision-making

An Overview of Introductory and Advanced Survival Analysis Methods in Clinical Applications: Where Have we Come so far?

Bayesian variable selection in joint modeling of longitudinal data and interval-censored failure time data

Nonparametric comparison of survival functions based on interval-censored data with unequal censoring.

A Tutorial on Statistical Models Based on Counting Processes

A flexible parametric modelling framework for survival analysis

Robust estimation of dependent competing risk model under interval monitoring and determining optimal inspection intervals

Personalized Screening Intervals for Biomarkers using Joint Models for Longitudinal and Survival Data

Bayesian parametric models for survival prediction in medical applications

Using Clinical Experts Beliefs to Compare Survival Models in Health Technology Assessment

Testing the equality of two survival functions with right truncated data