ArticleLifetime data analysis2025
Assessing delayed treatment benefits of immunotherapy using long-term average hazard: a novel test/estimation approach.
Article in Lifetime data analysis, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Delayed treatment effects on time-to-event outcomes are commonly observed in randomized controlled trials of cancer immunotherapies. When the treatment effect has a delayed onset, the conventional test/estimation approach-using the log-rank test for between-group comparison and Cox's hazard ratio to quantify the treatment effect-can be suboptimal. The log-rank test may lack power in such scenarios, and the interpretation of the hazard ratio is often ambiguous. Recently, alternative test/estimation approaches have been proposed to address these limitations. One such approach is based on long-term restricted mean survival time (LT-RMST), while another is based on average hazard with survival weight (AH-SW). This paper integrates these two concepts and introduces a novel long-term average hazard (LT-AH) approach with survival weight for both hypothesis testing and estimation. Numerical studies highlight specific scenarios where the proposed LT-AH method achieves higher power than the existing alternatives. The LT-AH for each group can be estimated nonparametrically, and the proposed between-group comparison maintains test/estimation coherency. Because the difference and ratio of LT-AH do not rely on model assumptions about the relationship between two groups, the LT-AH approach provides a robust framework for estimating the magnitude of between-group differences. Furthermore, LT-AH allows for treatment effect quantification in both absolute (difference in LT-AH) and relative (ratio of LT-AH) terms, aligning with guideline recommendations and addressing practical needs. Given its interpretability and improved power in certain settings, the proposed LT-AH approach offers a useful alternative to conventional hazard-based methods, particularly when delayed treatment effects are expected.
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.