Journal article
The role of censoring on progression free survival: Oncologist discretion advised
European journal of cancer (1990), v 51(16), pp 2269-2271
01 Nov 2015
PMID: 26259493
Featured in Collection : UN Sustainable Development Goals @ Drexel
Abstract
Censoring is increasingly appreciated as a potential bias affecting estimates of progression free survival (PFS) in randomised trials. In this commentary, we explore the central assumption of censoring. Censored patients are considered no more or less likely to undergo the event of interest than those who remain in the analysis. Instead however, if one makes alternate assumptions, that censored patients are different than those who remain on the trial, estimates of PFS change. Using the example of the recent BOLERO-2 trial of exemestane and everolimus, we show that by altering the assumptions for censoring, the major conclusions of clinical trials may change. As such, the number of censored patients at each time interval should be routinely reported in randomised trials to better understand the implications of censoring. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Metrics
Details
- Title
- The role of censoring on progression free survival: Oncologist discretion advised
- Creators
- Vinay Prasad - National Institutes of HealthUsama Bilal - Bloomberg
- Publication Details
- European journal of cancer (1990), v 51(16), pp 2269-2271
- Publisher
- Elsevier
- Number of pages
- 3
- Resource Type
- Journal article
- Language
- English
- Academic Unit
- Urban Health Collaborative
- Web of Science ID
- WOS:000363466800001
- Scopus ID
- 2-s2.0-84943659318
- Other Identifier
- 991019189200104721
UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
This publication has contributed to the advancement of the following goals:
InCites Highlights
Data related to this publication, from InCites Benchmarking & Analytics tool:
- Collaboration types
- Domestic collaboration
- Web of Science research areas
- Oncology