ArticleStatistics in medicine2025
Adjustment of Conditional Bias in Hazard Ratios for Group Sequential Testing of Progression-Free Survival and Overall Survival.
Article in Statistics in medicine, 2025. 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In confirmatory randomized controlled trials of patients with metastatic cancer, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) are often used as multiple primary endpoints. The overall hierarchical strategy is a typical multiplicity adjustment method that analyzes PFS once and performs an interim OS analysis at the time of PFS analysis using an alpha-spending function-only if the statistical significance of PFS is demonstrated. A subsequent final OS analysis is conducted if the interim OS analysis does not result in early stopping for efficacy. In this study, we focused on the adjustment of conditional bias (CB) in hazard ratio estimates for OS in both interim and final analyses when a trial applied the overall hierarchical strategy. As CB-adjusting estimators for a single primary endpoint may have limited performance, we extended the conditional mean-adjusted estimator to the case of an overall hierarchical strategy. Motivated by an actual oncology trial, we evaluated the performance of the proposed estimators through a simulation study. In the case of early stopping for efficacy, the CB of the proposed estimator was smaller than that of the existing methods with comparable root mean squared error.
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.