ArticleStatistics in medicine2026
Group Sequential Sample Size for Comparing Two Survival Probabilities at a Specific Time Point.
Article in Statistics in 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
We propose a novel method that simultaneously determines the sample size for testing two survival probabilities at a pre-specified time while guaranteeing Type I error control in both fixed and group-sequential trial designs. Simulations across varying hypothesized differences, failure distributions, censoring proportions, and nominal powers demonstrate consistent performance, while interim analyses highlight maintained nominal Type I error control and increased power at each look relative to the standard binomial approach, regardless of the underlying failure time distribution or spending function. Importantly, our method is especially useful for evaluating survival outcomes at a fixed time in randomized trials where one treatment arm includes neoadjuvant therapy prior to surgery while the other involves surgery alone. Furthermore, it is advantageous when the proportional hazards assumption is not satisfied, as often occurs in immunotherapy trials with delayed or time-varying treatment effects or crossing survival curves. The method is also applicable to randomized Phase II trials, where smaller sample sizes and the use of intermediate or surrogate time-to-event endpoints demand efficient data use and robust error control. We illustrate the approach with motivating examples in renal and prostate cancer. An accompanying R Shiny application enables investigators to compute sample sizes interactively, facilitating practical trial planning in diverse settings.
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.