On assessing the presence of evaluation‐time bias in progression‐free survival in randomized trials

Evaluation (or assessment)–time bias can arise in oncology trials that study progression‐free survival (PFS) when randomized groups have different patterns of timing of assessments. Modelling or computer simulation is sometimes used to explore the extent of such bias; valid results require building such simulations under realistic assumptions concerning the timing of assessments. This paper considers a trial that used a logrank test where computer simulations were based on unrealistic assumptions that severely overestimated the extent of potential bias. The paper shows that seemingly small differences in assumptions can lead to dramatic differences in the apparent operating characteristics of logrank tests. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Predicting analysis time in events‐driven clinical trials using accumulating time‐to‐event surrogate information

For clinical trials with time‐to‐event endpoints, predicting the accrual of the events of interest with precision is critical in determining the timing of interim and final analyses. For example, overall survival (OS) is often chosen as the primary efficacy endpoint in oncology studies, with planned interim and final analyses at a pre‐specified number of deaths. Often, correlated surrogate information, such as time‐to‐progression (TTP) and progression‐free survival, are also collected as secondary efficacy endpoints. It would be appealing to borrow strength from the surrogate information to improve the precision of the analysis time prediction. Currently available methods in the literature for predicting analysis timings do not consider utilizing the surrogate information. In this article, using OS and TTP as an example, a general parametric model for OS and TTP is proposed, with the assumption that disease progression could change the course of the overall survival. Progression‐free survival, related both to OS and TTP, will be handled separately, as it can be derived from OS and TTP. The authors seek to develop a prediction procedure using a Bayesian method and provide detailed implementation strategies under certain assumptions. Simulations are performed to evaluate the performance of the proposed method. An application to a real study is also provided. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

A Semiparametrically Efficient Estimator of the Time‐Varying Effects for Survival Data with Time‐Dependent Treatment

The timing of a time‐dependent treatment—for example, when to perform a kidney transplantation—is an important factor for evaluating treatment efficacy. A naïve comparison between the treated and untreated groups, while ignoring the timing of treatment, typically yields biased results that might favour the treated group because only patients who survive long enough will get treated. On the other hand, studying the effect of a time‐dependent treatment is often complex, as it involves modelling treatment history and accounting for the possible time‐varying nature of the treatment effect. We propose a varying‐coefficient Cox model that investigates the efficacy of a time‐dependent treatment by utilizing a global partial likelihood, which renders appealing statistical properties, including consistency, asymptotic normality and semiparametric efficiency. Extensive simulations verify the finite sample performance, and we apply the proposed method to study the efficacy of kidney transplantation for end‐stage renal disease patients in the US Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients.     

Analyzing survival data in conjunction with time-dependent surrogate endpoints in clinical trials

Current survival techniques do not provide a good method for handling clinical trials with a large percent of censored observations. This research proposes using time-dependent surrogates of survival as outcome variables, in conjunction with observed survival time, to improve the precision in comparing the relative effects of two treatments on the distribution of survival time. This is in contrast to the standard method used today which uses the marginal density of survival time, T. only, or the marginal density of a surrogate, X, only, therefore, ignoring some available information. The surrogate measure, X, may be a fixed value or a time-dependent variable, X(t). X is a summary measure of some of the covariates measured throughout the trial that provide additional information on a subject's survival time. It is possible to model these time-dependent covariate values and relate the parameters in the model to the parameters in the distribution of T given X. The result is that three new models are available for the analysis of clinical trials. All three models use the joint density of survival time and a surrogate measure. Given one of three different assumed mechanisms of the potential treatment effect, each of the three methods improves the precision of the treatment estimate.     

Bayesian accrual modeling and prediction in multicenter clinical trials with varying center activation times

Investigators who manage multicenter clinical trials need to pay careful attention to patterns of subject accrual, and the prediction of activation time for pending centers is potentially crucial for subject accrual prediction. We propose a Bayesian hierarchical model to predict subject accrual for multicenter clinical trials in which center activation times vary. We define center activation time as the time at which a center can begin enrolling patients in the trial. The difference in activation times between centers is assumed to follow an exponential distribution, and the model of subject accrual integrates prior information for the study with actual enrollment progress. We apply our proposed Bayesian multicenter accrual model to two multicenter clinical studies. The first is the PAIN‐CONTRoLS study, a multicenter clinical trial with a goal of activating 40 centers and enrolling 400 patients within 104 weeks. The second is the HOBIT trial, a multicenter clinical trial with a goal of activating 14 centers and enrolling 200 subjects within 36 months. In summary, the Bayesian multicenter accrual model provides a prediction of subject accrual while accounting for both center‐ and individual patient‐level variation.     

Analysis of progression-free survival in oncology trials: some common statistical issues

With the advent of ever more effective second and third line cancer treatments and the growing use of 'crossover' trial designs in oncology, in which patients switch to the alternate randomized treatment upon disease progression, progression-free survival (PFS) is an increasingly important endpoint in oncologic drug development. However, several concerns exist regarding the use of PFS as a basis to compare treatments. Unlike survival, the exact time of progression is unknown, so progression times might be over-estimated and, consequently, bias may be introduced when comparing treatments. Further, it is not uncommon for randomized therapy to be stopped prior to progression being documented due to toxicity or the initiation of additional anti-cancer therapy; in such cases patients are frequently not followed further for progression and, consequently, are right-censored in the analysis. This article reviews these issues and concludes that concerns relating to the exact timing of progression are generally overstated, with analysis techniques and simple alternative endpoints available to either remove bias entirely or at least provide reassurance via supportive analyses that bias is not present. Further, it is concluded that the regularly recommended manoeuvre to censor PFS time at dropout due to toxicity or upon the initiation of additional anti-cancer therapy is likely to favour the more toxic, less efficacious treatment and so should be avoided whenever possible.     

The application of bespoke spending functions in group‐sequential designs and the effect of delayed treatment switching in survival trials

For a group‐sequential trial with two pre‐planned analyses, stopping boundaries can be calculated using a simple SAS? programme on the basis of the asymptotic bivariate normality of the interim and final test statistics. Given the simplicity and transparency of this approach, it is appropriate for researchers to apply their own bespoke spending function as long as the rate of alpha spend is pre‐specified. One such application could be an oncology trial where progression free survival (PFS) is the primary endpoint and overall survival (OS) is also assessed, both at the same time as the analysis of PFS and also later following further patient follow‐up. In many circumstances it is likely, if PFS is significantly extended, that the protocol will be amended to allow patients in the control arm to start receiving the experimental regimen. Such an eventuality is likely to result in the diminution of any effect on OS. It is shown that spending a greater proportion of alpha at the first analysis of OS, using either Pocock or bespoke boundaries, will maintain and in some cases result in greater power given a fixed number of events. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Restricted mean survival time as a summary measure of time‐to‐event outcome

Many clinical research studies evaluate a time‐to‐event outcome, illustrate survival functions, and conventionally report estimated hazard ratios to express the magnitude of the treatment effect when comparing between groups. However, it may not be straightforward to interpret the hazard ratio clinically and statistically when the proportional hazards assumption is invalid. In some recent papers published in clinical journals, the use of restricted mean survival time (RMST) or τ ‐year mean survival time is discussed as one of the alternative summary measures for the time‐to‐event outcome. The RMST is defined as the expected value of time to event limited to a specific time point corresponding to the area under the survival curve up to the specific time point. This article summarizes the necessary information to conduct statistical analysis using the RMST, including the definition and statistical properties of the RMST, adjusted analysis methods, sample size calculation, information fraction for the RMST difference, and clinical and statistical meaning and interpretation. Additionally, we discuss how to set the specific time point to define the RMST from two main points of view. We also provide developed SAS codes to determine the sample size required to detect an expected RMST difference with appropriate power and reconstruct individual survival data to estimate an RMST reference value from a reported survival curve.     

Frailty modeling for clustered survival data: an application to birth interval in Bangladesh

The present work demonstrates an application of random effects model for analyzing birth intervals that are clustered into geographical regions. Observations from the same cluster are assumed to be correlated because usually they share certain unobserved characteristics between them. Ignoring the correlations among the observations may lead to incorrect standard errors of the estimates of parameters of interest. Beside making the comparisons between Cox's proportional hazards model and random effects model for analyzing geographically clustered time-to-event data, important demographic and socioeconomic factors that may affect the length of birth intervals of Bangladeshi women are also reported in this paper.     

Semiparametric Efficient Estimation in the Generalized Odds-Rate Class of Regression Models for Right-Censored Time-to-Event Data

The generalized odds-rate class of regression models for time to event data is indexed by a non-negative constant and assumes thatg(S(t|Z)) = (t) + Zwhere g(s) = log(^-1(s-) for > 0, g₀(s) = log(- log s), S(t|Z) is the survival function of the time to event for an individual with qx1 covariate vector Z, is a qx1 vector of unknown regression parameters, and (t) is some arbitrary increasing function of t. When =0, this model is equivalent to the proportional hazards model and when =1, this model reduces to the proportional odds model. In the presence of right censoring, we construct estimators for and exp((t)) and show that they are consistent and asymptotically normal. In addition, we show that the estimator for is semiparametric efficient in the sense that it attains the semiparametric variance bound.     

An investigation into the two‐stage meta‐analytic copula modelling approach for evaluating time‐to‐event surrogate endpoints which comprise of one or more events of interest

Clinical trials of experimental treatments must be designed with primary endpoints that directly measure clinical benefit for patients. In many disease areas, the recognised gold standard primary endpoint can take many years to mature, leading to challenges in the conduct and quality of clinical studies. There is increasing interest in using shorter‐term surrogate endpoints as substitutes for costly long‐term clinical trial endpoints; such surrogates need to be selected according to biological plausibility, as well as the ability to reliably predict the unobserved treatment effect on the long‐term endpoint. A number of statistical methods to evaluate this prediction have been proposed; this paper uses a simulation study to explore one such method in the context of time‐to‐event surrogates for a time‐to‐event true endpoint. This two‐stage meta‐analytic copula method has been extensively studied for time‐to‐event surrogate endpoints with one event of interest, but thus far has not been explored for the assessment of surrogates which have multiple events of interest, such as those incorporating information directly from the true clinical endpoint. We assess the sensitivity of the method to various factors including strength of association between endpoints, the quantity of data available, and the effect of censoring. In particular, we consider scenarios where there exist very little data on which to assess surrogacy. Results show that the two‐stage meta‐analytic copula method performs well under certain circumstances and could be considered useful in practice, but demonstrates limitations that may prevent universal use.     

Smooth Semi‐nonparametric Analysis for Mixture Cure Models and Its Application to Breast Cancer

Mixture cure models are widely used when a proportion of patients are cured. The proportional hazards mixture cure model and the accelerated failure time mixture cure model are the most popular models in practice. Usually the expectation–maximisation (EM) algorithm is applied to both models for parameter estimation. Bootstrap methods are used for variance estimation. In this paper we propose a smooth semi‐nonparametric (SNP) approach in which maximum likelihood is applied directly to mixture cure models for parameter estimation. The variance can be estimated by the inverse of the second derivative of the SNP likelihood. A comprehensive simulation study indicates good performance of the proposed method. We investigate stage effects in breast cancer by applying the proposed method to breast cancer data from the South Carolina Cancer Registry.     

Design considerations in clinical trials with cure rate survival data: A case study in oncology

For clinical trials with time‐to‐event as the primary endpoint, the clinical cutoff is often event‐driven and the log‐rank test is the most commonly used statistical method for evaluating treatment effect. However, this method relies on the proportional hazards assumption in that it has the maximal power in this circumstance. In certain disease areas or populations, some patients can be curable and never experience the events despite a long follow‐up. The event accumulation may dry out after a certain period of follow‐up and the treatment effect could be reflected as the combination of improvement of cure rate and the delay of events for those uncurable patients. Study power depends on both cure rate improvement and hazard reduction. In this paper, we illustrate these practical issues using simulation studies and explore sample size recommendations, alternative ways for clinical cutoffs, and efficient testing methods with the highest study power possible.     

A Semi-parametric Bayesian Analysis of Survival Data Based on Lévy-driven Processes

In the presence of covariate information, the proportional hazards model is one of the most popular models. In this paper, in a Bayesian nonparametric framework, we use a Markov (Lévy-driven) process to model the baseline hazard rate. Previous Bayesian nonparametric models have been based on neutral to the right processes, which have a number of drawbacks, such as discreteness of the cumulative hazard function. We allow the covariates to be time dependent functions and develop a full posterior analysis via substitution sampling. A detailed illustration is presented.     

On a measure of information gain for regression models in survival analysis

Papers dealing with measures of predictive power in survival analysis have seen their independence of censoring, or their estimates being unbiased under censoring, as the most important property. We argue that this property has been wrongly understood. Discussing the so-called measure of information gain, we point out that we cannot have unbiased estimates if all values, greater than a given time τ, are censored. This is due to the fact that censoring before τ has a different effect than censoring after τ. Such τ is often introduced by design of a study. Independence can only be achieved under the assumption of the model being valid after τ, which is impossible to verify. But if one is willing to make such an assumption, we suggest using multiple imputation to obtain a consistent estimate. We further show that censoring has different effects on the estimation of the measure for the Cox model than for parametric models, and we discuss them separately. We also give some warnings about the usage of the measure, especially when it comes to comparing essentially different models.     

Comparison of the restricted mean survival time with the hazard ratio in superiority trials with a time‐to‐event end point

With the emergence of novel therapies exhibiting distinct mechanisms of action compared to traditional treatments, departure from the proportional hazard (PH) assumption in clinical trials with a time‐to‐event end point is increasingly common. In these situations, the hazard ratio may not be a valid statistical measurement of treatment effect, and the log‐rank test may no longer be the most powerful statistical test. The restricted mean survival time (RMST) is an alternative robust and clinically interpretable summary measure that does not rely on the PH assumption. We conduct extensive simulations to evaluate the performance and operating characteristics of the RMST‐based inference and against the hazard ratio–based inference, under various scenarios and design parameter setups. The log‐rank test is generally a powerful test when there is evident separation favoring 1 treatment arm at most of the time points across the Kaplan‐Meier survival curves, but the performance of the RMST test is similar. Under non‐PH scenarios where late separation of survival curves is observed, the RMST‐based test has better performance than the log‐rank test when the truncation time is reasonably close to the tail of the observed curves. Furthermore, when flat survival tail (or low event rate) in the experimental arm is expected, selecting the minimum of the maximum observed event time as the truncation timepoint for the RMST is not recommended. In addition, we recommend the inclusion of analysis based on the RMST curve over the truncation time in clinical settings where there is suspicion of substantial departure from the PH assumption.     

Quantifying treatment differences in confirmatory trials under non-proportional hazards

Proportional hazards are a common assumption when designing confirmatory clinical trials in oncology. With the emergence of immunotherapy and novel targeted therapies, departure from the proportional hazard assumption is not rare in nowadays clinical research. Under non-proportional hazards, the hazard ratio does not have a straightforward clinical interpretation, and the log-rank test is no longer the most powerful statistical test even though it is still valid. Nevertheless, the log-rank test and the hazard ratio are still the primary analysis tools, and traditional approaches such as sample size increase are still proposed to account for the impact of non-proportional hazards. The weighed log-rank test and the test based on the restricted mean survival time (RMST) are receiving a lot of attention as a potential alternative to the log-rank test. We conduct a simulation study comparing the performance and operating characteristics of the log-rank test, the weighted log-rank test and the test based on the RMST, including a treatment effect estimation, under different non-proportional hazards patterns. Results show that, under non-proportional hazards, the hazard ratio and weighted hazard ratio have no straightforward clinical interpretation whereas the RMST ratio can be interpreted regardless of the proportional hazards assumption. In terms of power, the RMST achieves a similar performance when compared to the log-rank test.     

Effect of censoring on adjusting for covariates in comparison of survival times

The increase in the variance of the estimate of treatment effect which results from omitting a dichotomous or continuous covariate is quantified as a function of censoring. The efficiency of not adjusting for a covariate is measured by the ratio of the variance obtained with and without adjustment for the covariate. The variance is derived using the Weibull proportional hazards model. Under random censoring, the efficiency of not adjusting for a continuous covariate is an increasing function of the percentage of censored observations.     

Regression analysis of case-cohort studies in the presence of dependent interval censoring

The case-cohort design is widely used as a means of reducing the cost in large cohort studies, especially when the disease rate is low and covariate measurements may be expensive, and has been discussed by many authors. In this paper, we discuss regression analysis of case-cohort studies that produce interval-censored failure time with dependent censoring, a situation for which there does not seem to exist an established approach. For inference, a sieve inverse probability weighting estimation procedure is developed with the use of Bernstein polynomials to approximate the unknown baseline cumulative hazard functions. The proposed estimators are shown to be consistent and the asymptotic normality of the resulting regression parameter estimators is established. A simulation study is conducted to assess the finite sample properties of the proposed approach and indicates that it works well in practical situations. The proposed method is applied to an HIV/AIDS case-cohort study that motivated this investigation.