ArticleNPJ precision oncology2025
Benchmarking progression-free survival ratio as primary endpoint in precision oncology clinical trials.
Article in NPJ precision oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Deep molecular profiling of biliary tract cancer uncovers novel biological mechanisms and therapeutic opportunities.ESMO open · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Transcriptomics: From Human-in-the-Loop to Agentic AI.Journal of personalized medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
21 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Progression Free Survival Ratio (PFSratio), as defined as the ratio between PFS on investigational treatment (PFS2) and PFS on the last prior therapy (PFS1), is a popular endpoint in precision oncology (PO) studies. In this work, five methodologies for PFSratio-based trial analysis (count-based, Kaplan Meier, Kernel-based Kaplan Meier, parametric and midrank) and two for trial design (GBVE and Weibull) are benchmarked. The Kernel-based Kaplan Meier analysis is most recommended, as it handles informative censoring and does not require PFS1/PFS2 distribution assumptions. Sample size and power calculation methods perform best when applied to settings with expected high PFS1/PFS2 correlation and median ratio. Analysis of five clinical trials (MOSCATO 01, WINTHER, MASTER, SHIVA and POG570) from >800 patients revealed an overall weak PFS1/PFS2 correlation (Kendall's τ range 0.17-0.35), and an asymptotically unbiased median S
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.