ArticleCPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology2026
Impact of Event-Related Treatment Modifications in Exposure-Response Analyses of Repeated Time-to-Event Data.
Article in CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The refinement of repeated exact time-to-event modeling: methodological refinements and implementation in NONMEMFrontiers in pharmacology · 2026Article
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
Exposure-response (ER) analyses of repeated time-to-event (RTTE) data can be confounded when treatment modifications occur due to the event of interest. One particularly challenging scenario is when an event is preceded by an undocumented clinical worsening leading to treatment discontinuation shortly before the event. Event-related treatment modifications introduce potential reversed causality in the ER analysis and bias, as events may predict exposure, rather than exposure predicting events. We systematically evaluated three analysis approaches in multiple simulated placebo-controlled studies to assess their capacity to estimate unbiased ER relationships: (1) average exposure (2) time-varying exposure (3) average exposure + percentile-rank of the average amount of blinded study treatment received. The novel Approach 3 was designed to remove confounding from event-related treatment modifications by leveraging information on blinded study treatment received (including in the placebo treatment arm). Approach 1 was biased in all scenarios with event-related treatment discontinuations. Approach 2 generally resulted in unbiased estimates, except in the scenarios in which events were sometimes preceded by a treatment discontinuation. In these scenarios, only Approach 3 provided unbiased estimates with linear ER, though it showed slight bias with pronounced nonlinear relationships. In conclusion, treatment modifications associated with events warrant careful consideration in ER analyses of RTTE data. Using a ranked measure of the average amount of blinded study treatment received may be used to lower the risk of confounding due to treatment modifications.
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.