ArticleStatistics in medicine2017
Estimation in multi-arm two-stage trials with treatment selection and time-to-event endpoint.
Article in Statistics in medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Confidence Intervals for Adaptive Trial Designs I: A Methodological Review.Statistics in medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Adjusting for treatment selection in phase II/III clinical trials with time to event data.Statistics in medicine · 2023Trial
- Statistical Inference for a Two-Stage Adaptive Seamless Design Using Different Binary Endpoints.Statistics in medicine · 2025Article
- Point estimation for adaptive trial designs II: Practical considerations and guidance.Statistics in medicine · 2023Review
- Point estimation for adaptive trial designs I: A methodological review.Statistics in medicine · 2023Review
- Point and interval estimation in two-stage adaptive designs with time to event data and biomarker-driven subpopulation selection.Statistics in medicine · 2020Article
- Efficient Adaptive Designs for Clinical Trials of Interventions for COVID-19.Statistics in biopharmaceutical research · 2020Article
- Estimation of treatment effects following a sequential trial of multiple treatments.Statistics in medicine · 2020Article
- Design and estimation in clinical trials with subpopulation selection.Statistics in medicine · 2018Article
- Point estimation following two-stage adaptive threshold enrichment clinical trials.Statistics in medicine · 2018Article
- Adaptive designs in clinical trials: why use them, and how to run and report them.BMC medicine · 2018Article
- Estimation in multi-arm two-stage trials with treatment selection and time-to-event endpoint.Statistics in medicine · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
We consider estimation of treatment effects in two-stage adaptive multi-arm trials with a common control. The best treatment is selected at interim, and the primary endpoint is modeled via a Cox proportional hazards model. The maximum partial-likelihood estimator of the log hazard ratio of the selected treatment will overestimate the true treatment effect in this case. Several methods for reducing the selection bias have been proposed for normal endpoints, including an iterative method based on the estimated conditional selection biases and a shrinkage approach based on empirical Bayes theory. We adapt these methods to time-to-event data and compare the bias and mean squared error of all methods in an extensive simulation study and apply the proposed methods to reconstructed data from the FOCUS trial. We find that all methods tend to overcorrect the bias, and only the shrinkage methods can reduce the mean squared error. © 2017 The Authors. Statistics in Medicine Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.