ArticleCancer medicine2026
Studying When to Add Biological Therapy to Cytotoxic Therapy in Advanced Cancer Care Using Real World Data: How to Avoid Design Choices That Generate Immortal Time.
Article in Cancer medicine, 2026. 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
23 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSince real-world data lack information on treatment assignment (usually the only information available is treatment prescription/administration) and early outcomes can happen in advanced cancer, some design choices may introduce immortal time due to selection or due to treatment strategy misclassification.
objectiveTo illustrate design choices that would biassedly introduce immortal time and propose unbiased alternatives, using as a case study the estimation of the effects of different monoclonal antibody (mAb) sequencing strategies on overall survival in colorectal cancer patients.
methodsWe specified a target trial to estimate the effect on overall survival of initiating mAb within 8 weeks of starting first line chemotherapy versus initiating mAb with second line chemotherapy. The first biased design choice would be requiring the initiation of second line chemotherapy for eligibility. This was avoided by aligning eligibility with the initiation of first line chemotherapy. The second biased design choice would be excluding from the first line mAb strategy those who die during the grace period without starting mAb. This was avoided separately via cloning, censoring and weighting and by sequential emulation.
resultsThere were 1014 eligible patients in GEMCAD 1401. The CCW approach estimated a 4-year survival difference (second-first line mAb) of 4.3% (95% CI) (-3.3%; 10.0%) and a risk ratio (RR) of 0.95 (0.88; 1.04). Sequential trial emulation estimated a survival difference of -2.8% (-7.5%; 1.2%) and a RR of 1.04 (0.98; 1.10). Biased analyses that introduced immortal time estimated an implausible early survival benefit for mAb initiation with second-line (6-month RR of 0.13 (0.03; 0.28)).
conclusionsOur results are compatible with no effect on survival by mAb sequencing. Misalignment of time zero, treatment assignment, and eligibility introduced immortal time.
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.