ArticleBJC reports2024
Estimating cure proportion in cancer clinical trials using flexible parametric cure models.
Article in BJC reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundIn the context of survival analysis in recent cancer clinical trials, there has been an increasing interest in the proportion of patients who are not susceptible to the event, known as the cure proportion. To estimate it, cure models implicitly specify the time point when patients are considered cured, although the impact of the cure point position on cure proportion estimates is unclear.
methodsSensitivity of cure proportion estimates to the knot number and placement in flexible parametric cure models was examined using data from a clinical trial of CheckMate 141, an immuno-oncology compound. The performance of the model and procedures to determine the cure point position were evaluated using a simulation study.
resultsAnalysis of the CheckMate 141 data showed the impact of the last knot position on the cure proportion estimate and model fit. Simulations revealed that the flexible parametric cure model with the last knot at the last observed event time overestimated the cure proportion. This bias was reduced when the last knot was placed later.
conclusionsFor cure proportion estimation in clinical trials with survival outcomes, the flexible parametric cure model can be an attractive alternative to the Kaplan-Meier method.
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.