The log-rank test and Kaplan--Meier plot are standard tools for analyzing time-to-event data in randomized clinical trials, yet neither provides a summary of the magnitude of the treatment effect. Practitioners typically fill this gap by reporting a hazard ratio from a Cox proportional-hazards model or an acceleration factor from an accelerated failure time (AFT) model, but both require assumptions beyond those needed for the log-rank test or Kaplan--Meier estimator. We propose two nonparametric confidence intervals for scalar effect-size summaries, an additive shift c and a multiplicative factor $\rho$, obtained by inverting the log-rank test under sharp null hypotheses of constant treatment effects. Building on the randomization-inference framework of Li and Small (2023), both intervals are valid under the randomization distribution alone, requiring no assumptions for the event-time distribution. We evaluate the proposed multiplicative interval via simulation, finding that it maintains nominal coverage across a range of censoring rates and sample sizes, including under data-generating processes that misspecify a parametric AFT model, while incurring only a modest efficiency loss compared to parametric AFT inference under correct specification. We illustrate the approach using data from a randomized trial of rhDNase for cystic fibrosis and provide R code and a Shiny application for ease of implementation.
Simulating realistic time-to-event data is essential for planning and evaluating complex clinical trial designs. Conventional approaches often sample event times from parametric families, such as Weibull or log-normal distributions, which restrict hazard shapes and may poorly represent observed survival data. We propos...
Yao Chen, Jiren Sun, Yu-Xin Ding et al.· 0 citations
Restricted mean survival time offers a compelling nonparametric alternative to hazard ratios for right-censored time-to-event data, particularly when the proportional hazards assumption is violated. By capturing the total event-free time over a specified horizon, it provides an intuitive and clinically meaningful mea...
Jing-Hao Sun, D. Schaubel, E. T. Tchetgen Tchetgen· Biometrika· 0 citations
Many observational studies evaluate the risks and benefits of time-varying interventions. In these longitudinal settings, the primary outcome of interest is often a clinical event that is precluded by mortality, which acts as a competing risk. Evaluating dynamic treatment regimes (DTRs) is complicated by time-varying c...
Nitya Shah, Laura D. Carbone, Howard A. Fink et al.· 0 citations
Studies with complex censoring or truncation mechanisms in survival data have historically simplified their data to use right censoring methods and to report treatment effect measures such as the hazard ratio calculated under the right-censoring mechanism. This can lead to loss of information, potential biases, a...
Sandra Castro-Pearson, Yi-Fei Sun, Chap T. Le et al.· BMC Medical Research Methodo...· 0 citations
A new inference method for conducting multiple-treatment comparisons involving endpoints within the generalized linear model (GLM) framework under covariate-adaptive randomization (CAR) that can effectively control Type I error while potentially improving power.
Two-sample survival probability curves (TSSPCs) provide a concise way to visualize treatment differences in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). In this paper, we propose various area under the curve (AUC) metrics for TSSPCs as numerical measures for treatment effects. First, in the same spirit as the restricted mean s...
Michelle Leeberg, Thomas A. Murray, Xiang-Hua Luo· Contemporary Clinical Trials· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.