similar to: survival - summary and score test for ridge coxph()

It seems to me that R returns the unpenalized log-likelihood for the ratio likelihood test when ridge regression Cox proportional model is implemented. Is this as expected? In the example below, if I am not mistaken, fit$loglik[2] is unpenalized log-likelihood for the final estimates of coefficients. I would expect to get the penalized log-likelihood. I would like to check if this is as expected.

Hello, I have questions regarding penalized Cox regression using survival package (functions coxph() and ridge()). I am using R 2.8.0 on Ubuntu Linux and survival package version 2.35-4. Question 1. Consider the following example from help(ridge): > fit1 <- coxph(Surv(futime, fustat) ~ rx + ridge(age, ecog.ps, theta=1), ovarian) As I understand, this builds a model in which `rx' is

Dear All: I have some questions about the output of coxph. Below is the input and output: ---------------------------------------- > coxph(formula = Surv(futime, fustat) ~ age + rx + ecog.ps, data = + ovarian, x = TRUE) Call: coxph(formula = Surv(futime, fustat) ~ age + rx + ecog.ps, data = ovarian, x = TRUE) coef exp(coef) se(coef) z p age 0.147 1.158

Dear all, I need to calculate likelihood ratio test for ridge regression. In February I have reported a bug where coxph returns unpenalized log-likelihood for final beta estimates for ridge coxph regression. In high-dimensional settings ridge regression models usually fail for lower values of lambda. As the result of it, in such settings the ridge regressions have higher values of lambda (e.g.

Hi, I'm sure this should be simple but I can't figure it out! I want to get the median survival calculated by the survfit function and use the value rather than just be able to print it. Something like this: library(survival) data(lung) lung.byPS = survfit(Surv (time, status) ~ ph.ecog, data=lung) # lung.byPS Call: survfit(formula = Surv(time, status) ~ ph.ecog, data = lung) 1

Calum had a long question about drawing survival curves after fitting a Weibull model, using pweibull, which I have not reproduced. It is easier to get survival curves using the predict function. Here is a simple example: > library(survival) > tfit <- survreg(Surv(time, status) ~ factor(ph.ecog), data=lung) > table(lung$ph.ecog) 0 1 2 3 <NA> 63 113 50 1

Dear all: Could anyone please provide some R codes to plot the below survival data to compare two groups (0 vs 1) after 2 simulations (TRL)? need 95% prediction interval on the plot from these 2 trials. I would like to simulate 1000 trials later. Thanks a lot for your great help and consideration! yan TRL ID ECOG BASE PTR8 GROUP POP ST ind 1 1 1 1 2.2636717 0.255634126 1 1 99.4 F 3 1 2 1

I was looking at how the model.frame method for lm works and comparing it to my own for coxph. The big difference is that I try to retain xlevels and predvars information for a new model frame, and lm does not. I use a call to model.frame in predict.coxph, which is why I went that route, but never noted the difference till now (preparing for my course in Nashville). Could someone shed light

Dear R help, I am having a problem with the Design package and my problem is detailed here. I fit a cox model to my data and validate the Somer's Dxy using the Design package. (Because of computation time problem, i only try 10 bootstrap samples for the time being) This is the model without stratification: > library(Design) >

--begin inclusion --- I am trying to extract output information from the survfit function in order to generate a matrix of select output for multiple factors. Specifically, I am interested in extracting the number of events (in the output below: 106, 2, 3). The variable names represented in my function (ee) are shown below, but none of those variables correspond to the column of events as shown

Hi I am trying to understand how to get the validate() function in Design to work with the subset option. I tried this: ovarian.cph=cph(Surv(futime, fustat) ~ age+factor(ecog.ps)+strat(rx), time.inc=1000, x=T, y=T, data=ovarian) validate(ovarian.cph) #fine when no subset is used, but the following two don't work: > validate(ovarian.cph, subset=ovarian$ecog.ps==2) Error in

Hi everybody. I'm trying to fit a weibull survival model with a spline basis for the predictor, using the survival library. I've noticed that it doesn't seem to be possible to use the aic method to choose the degrees of freedom for the spline basis in a parametric regression (although it's fine with the cox model, or if the degrees of freedom are specified directly by the user),

--- included message ---- Thus, my question is: *What common measures exists for ranking/measuring variable importance of participating variables in a CART model? And how can this be computed using R (for example, when using the rpart package)* ---end ---- Consider the following printout from rpart summary(rpart(time ~ age + ph.ecog + pat.karno, data=lung)) Node number 1: 228 observations,

Dear List, How do I extract the approximate Wald test for the frailty (in the following example 17.89 value)? What about the P-values, other Chisq, DF, se(coef) and se2? How can they be extracted? ######################################################> kfitm1 Call: coxph(formula = Surv(time, status) ~ age + sex + disease + frailty(id, dist = "gauss"), data = kidney)

Hi, Is it normal to get intercept in the list of covariates in the output of survreg function with standard error, z, p.value etc? Does it mean that intercept was fitted with the covariates? Does Value column represent coefficients or some thing else? Regards, ------------------------------------------------- tmp = survreg(Surv(futime, fustat) ~ ecog.ps + rx, ovarian,

On examining non-linearity of Cox coefficients with penalized splines - I have not been able to dig up a completely clear description of the test performed in R or S-plus. >From the Therneau and Grambsch book (2000 - page 126) I gather that the test reported for "linear" has as its null hypothesis that the spline coefficient is the same at the center of basis. Thus, in the example

Hello, i have this dataset http://www.umass.edu/statdata/statdata/data/pharynx.txt. the variables GRADE, T_STAGE anda N_STAGE are qualitative or quantitative variables??? i only have this simple doubt...! another example: why in the dataset ovarian (library survival) the variable ecog.ps: ECOG performance status (1 is better, see reference) it is consider quantitative? Thank's for

Dear R users, My apologies for the simple question, as I'm starting to learn the concepts behind the Cox PH model. I was just experimenting with the survival and rms packages for this. I'm simply trying to obtain the expected survival time (as opposed to the probability of survival at a given time t). I can't seem to find an option from the "type" argument in the predict

My objective is to start having meta-data on objects that I create. For example, consider the following function: assign2 <- function(x, ...) { assign("x", ...) attr(x, "creation time") <- Sys.time() x <<- x } assign2("x", 1:4) "assign2" assigns to x the vector 1:4, and it then also adds the creation time of the object. (Hat tip goes to

I am trying to fit a lognormal distribution on interval-censored data. Some of my intervals have a lower bound of zero. Unfortunately, it seems like survreg() cannot deal with lower bounds of zero, despite the fact that plnorm(0)==0 and pnorm(-Inf)==0 are well defined. Below is a short example to reproduce the problem. Does anyone know why survreg() must behave that way? Is there an alternate