CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Other Relevant Articles

Abstract

Recommended Article

Coronary Catheterization and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in China: 10-Year Results From the China PEACE-Retrospective CathPCI Study Impact of Oxidative Stress on the Heart and Vasculature: Part 2 of a 3-Part Series The Aging Cardiovascular System: Understanding It at the Cellular and Clinical Levels Screening for Cardiovascular Disease Risk With Electrocardiography: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement Critical Appraisal of Contemporary Clinical Endpoint Definitions in Coronary Intervention Trials: A Guidance Document Relation of prior statin and anti-hypertensive use to severity of disease among patients hospitalized with COVID-19: Findings from the American Heart Association’s COVID-19 Cardiovascular Disease Registry Comparison of a Novel Biodegradable Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stent With a Durable Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stent 5-Year Outcomes of the Randomized BIOFLOW-II Trial Optimal medical therapy improves clinical outcomes in patients undergoing revascularization with percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting: insights from the Synergy Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention with TAXUS and Cardiac Surgery (SYNTAX) trial at the 5-year follow-up

Volume 74, Issue 16, October 2019

JOURNAL:J Am Coll Cardiol. Article Link

Nonproportional Hazards for Time-to-Event Outcomes in Clinical Trials: JACC Review Topic of the Week

J Gregson, L Sharples, GW Stone et al. Keywords: clinical trials; Cox proportional hazards; nonproportional hazards; statistics; time-to-event outcomes; trial design

ABSTRACT


Most major clinical trials in cardiology report time-to-event outcomes using the Cox proportional hazards model so that a treatment effect is estimated as the hazard ratio between groups, accompanied by its 95% confidence interval and a log-rank p value. But nonproportionality of hazards (non-PH) over time occurs quite often, making alternative analysis strategies appropriate. This review presents real examples of cardiology trials with different types of non-PH: an early treatment effect, a late treatment effect, and a diminishing treatment effect. In such scenarios, the relative merits of a Cox model, an accelerated failure time model, a milestone analysis, and restricted mean survival time are examined. Some post hoc analyses for exploring any specific pattern of non-PH are also presented. Recommendations are made, particularly regarding how to handle non-PH in pre-defined Statistical Analysis Plans, trial publications, and regulatory submissions.