A flexible and coherent test/estimation procedure based on restricted mean survival times for censored time‐to‐event data in randomized clinical trials

In randomized clinical trials where time-to-event is the primary outcome, almost routinely, the logrank test is prespecified as the primary test and the hazard ratio is used to quantify treatment effect. If the ratio of 2 hazard functions is not constant, the logrank test is not optimal and the interpretation of hazard ratio is not obvious. When such a nonproportional hazards case is expected at the design stage, the conventional practice is to prespecify another member of weighted logrank tests, eg, Peto-Prentice-Wilcoxon test. Alternatively, one may specify a robust test as the primary test, which can capture various patterns of difference between 2 event time distributions. However, most of those tests do not have companion procedures to quantify the treatment difference, and investigators have fallen back on reporting treatment effect estimates not associated with the primary test. Such incoherence in the "test/estimation" procedure may potentially mislead clinicians/patients who have to balance risk-benefit for treatment decision. To address this, we propose a flexible and coherent test/estimation procedure based on restricted mean survival time, where the truncation time τ is selected data dependently. The proposed procedure is composed of a prespecified test and an estimation of corresponding robust and interpretable quantitative treatment effect. The utility of the new procedure is demonstrated by numerical studies based on 2 randomized cancer clinical trials; the test is dramatically more powerful than the logrank, Wilcoxon tests, and the restricted mean survival time-based test with a fixed τ, for the patterns of difference seen in these cancer clinical trials.

[1]  Hajime Uno,et al.  A versatile test for equality of two survival functions based on weighted differences of Kaplan–Meier curves , 2015, Statistics in medicine.

[2]  Z. Ying,et al.  A resampling method based on pivotal estimating functions , 1994 .

[3]  G. Neuhaus,et al.  Conditional Rank Tests for the Two-Sample Problem Under Random Censorship , 1993 .

[4]  Naotoshi Sugimoto,et al.  Ramucirumab plus paclitaxel versus placebo plus paclitaxel in patients with previously treated advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (RAINBOW): a double-blind, randomised phase 3 trial. , 2014, The Lancet. Oncology.

[5]  R. Tarone,et al.  On the distribution of the maximum of the longrank statistic and the modified Wilcoxon statistic , 1981 .

[6]  Jon A. Wellner,et al.  Weak Convergence and Empirical Processes: With Applications to Statistics , 1996 .

[7]  Patrick Royston,et al.  Restricted mean survival time: an alternative to the hazard ratio for the design and analysis of randomized trials with a time-to-event outcome , 2013, BMC Medical Research Methodology.

[8]  R. A’Hern Restricted Mean Survival Time: An Obligatory End Point for Time-to-Event Analysis in Cancer Trials? , 2016, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[9]  S G Self,et al.  An adaptive weighted log-rank test with application to cancer prevention and screening trials. , 1991, Biometrics.

[10]  M. Piccart,et al.  Phase III study comparing exemestane with tamoxifen as first-line hormonal treatment of metastatic breast cancer in postmenopausal women: the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Breast Cancer Cooperative Group. , 2008, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[11]  G Heimann,et al.  Permutational distribution of the log-rank statistic under random censorship with applications to carcinogenicity assays. , 1998, Biometrics.

[12]  M S Pepe,et al.  Weighted Kaplan-Meier statistics: a class of distance tests for censored survival data. , 1989, Biometrics.

[13]  R. Prentice Linear rank tests with right censored data , 1978 .

[14]  N. Lazar,et al.  The ASA Statement on p-Values: Context, Process, and Purpose , 2016 .

[15]  R. Chappell,et al.  Describing Differences in Survival Curves. , 2016, JAMA oncology.

[16]  Song Yang,et al.  Improved Logrank‐Type Tests for Survival Data Using Adaptive Weights , 2010, Biometrics.

[17]  Z. Ying,et al.  Checking the Cox model with cumulative sums of martingale-based residuals , 1993 .

[18]  Patrick Royston,et al.  Augmenting the logrank test in the design of clinical trials in which non-proportional hazards of the treatment effect may be anticipated , 2016, BMC Medical Research Methodology.

[19]  Lihui Zhao,et al.  On the restricted mean survival time curve in survival analysis , 2016, Biometrics.

[20]  L. Tian,et al.  Efficiency of two sample tests via the restricted mean survival time for analyzing event time observations , 2018, Biometrics.

[21]  H. Uno,et al.  Alternatives to Hazard Ratios for Comparing the Efficacy or Safety of Therapies in Noninferiority Studies. , 2015, Annals of internal medicine.

[22]  J. Peto,et al.  Asymptotically Efficient Rank Invariant Test Procedures , 1972 .

[23]  Nicky J Welton,et al.  Enhanced secondary analysis of survival data: reconstructing the data from published Kaplan-Meier survival curves , 2012, BMC Medical Research Methodology.

[24]  P. Royston,et al.  The use of restricted mean survival time to estimate the treatment effect in randomized clinical trials when the proportional hazards assumption is in doubt , 2011, Statistics in medicine.

[25]  D. Zucker,et al.  Weighted log rank type statistics for comparing survival curves when there is a time lag in the effectiveness of treatment , 1990 .

[26]  P. Royston,et al.  Life expectancy difference and life expectancy ratio: two measures of treatment effects in randomised trials with non-proportional hazards , 2017, British Medical Journal.

[27]  Michael R. Kosorok,et al.  The Versatility of Function-Indexed Weighted Log-Rank Statistics , 1999 .

[28]  J O'Quigley,et al.  Estimating average regression effect under non-proportional hazards. , 2000, Biostatistics.

[29]  L. Trinquart,et al.  Comparison of Treatment Effects Measured by the Hazard Ratio and by the Ratio of Restricted Mean Survival Times in Oncology Randomized Controlled Trials. , 2016, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[30]  M. Buyse,et al.  The Net Chance of a Longer Survival as a Patient-Oriented Measure of Treatment Benefit in Randomized Clinical Trials. , 2016, JAMA oncology.

[31]  Yoshiaki Uyama,et al.  Moving beyond the hazard ratio in quantifying the between-group difference in survival analysis. , 2014, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[32]  C. Chauvel,et al.  Tests for comparing estimated survival functions , 2014 .

[33]  Jae Won Lee,et al.  SOME VERSATILE TESTS BASED ON THE SIMULTANEOUS USE OF WEIGHTED LOG-RANK STATISTICS , 1996 .

[34]  Joseph L. Gastwirth,et al.  The Use of Maximin Efficiency Robust Tests in Combining Contingency Tables and Survival Analysis , 1985 .