Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This study evaluates the effectiveness of federated learning (FL) for survival analysis using a cross-institutional breast cancer dataset, addressing the challenges of data privacy and heterogeneity. By comparing three survival models鈥擟ox Proportional Hazards, DeepSurv, and Random Survival Forest鈥攁cross different training paradigms, the authors find that FL not only outperforms local training but also matches or exceeds centralized performance in certain cases. Notably, Random Survival Forest demonstrates superior discrimination, calibration, and robustness, while the choice of federated optimization strategy significantly impacts performance stability.
Federated learning can outperform local training in survival analysis, with Random Survival Forest emerging as the top model for heterogeneous healthcare data.
Survival analysis is central to clinical decision-making, yet reliable time-to-event models require large, diverse cohorts that are rarely available at a single institution, while privacy regulations restrict the centralization of patient data. Federated learning (FL) offers a privacy-preserving alternative by training shared models without exchanging raw data, but its effectiveness for survival modeling under realistic, heterogeneous conditions remains insufficiently understood. This paper presents a systematic, multi-model evaluation of federated survival analysis on a cross-institutional breast cancer cohort with naturally heterogeneous distributed clients. Three representative survival models, the Cox Proportional Hazards model, DeepSurv, and Random Survival Forest (RSF), are compared across centralized, local, and federated training, and three federated optimization strategies (FedAvg, FedProx, and FedAdam) are assessed for the gradient-based models. Results show that FL consistently outperforms local training and approaches, and occasionally exceeds, centralized performance, while RSF offers the best overall balance of discrimination, calibration, and robustness across heterogeneous clients. We further find that performance depends on the diversity of client distributions, and that FedAvg and FedProx are stronger and more stable than FedAdam. Based on these findings, we derive practical, decision-oriented guidelines mapping data, privacy, interpretability, and resource constraints to recommended model and training-paradigm choices for federated survival modeling in healthcare.
