Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Comparing the Survival Analysis of Two or More Groups01:20

Comparing the Survival Analysis of Two or More Groups

122
Survival analysis is a cornerstone of medical research, used to evaluate the time until an event of interest occurs, such as death, disease recurrence, or recovery. Unlike standard statistical methods, survival analysis is particularly adept at handling censored data—instances where the event has not occurred for some participants by the end of the study or remains unobserved. To address these unique challenges, specialized techniques like the Kaplan-Meier estimator, log-rank test, and...
122
The Mantel-Cox Log-Rank Test01:19

The Mantel-Cox Log-Rank Test

280
The Mantel-Cox log-rank test is a widely used statistical method for comparing the survival distributions of two groups. It tests whether a statistically significant difference exists in survival times between the groups without assuming a specific distribution for the survival data, making it a non-parametric test. This flexibility makes the log-rank test particularly valuable in medical research and other fields where the timing of an event, such as death or disease recurrence, is of...
280
Hazard Ratio01:12

Hazard Ratio

77
The hazard ratio (HR) is a widely used measure in clinical trials to compare the risk of events, such as death or disease recurrence, between two groups over time. It reflects the ratio of hazard rates—the instantaneous risk of the event occurring—between a treatment group and a control group. This measure provides valuable insights into the relative effectiveness of a treatment by assessing how the risk of an event differs between the two groups.
For example, in a clinical trial...
77
Kaplan-Meier Approach01:24

Kaplan-Meier Approach

79
The Kaplan-Meier estimator is a non-parametric method used to estimate the survival function from time-to-event data. In medical research, it is frequently employed to measure the proportion of patients surviving for a certain period after treatment. This estimator is fundamental in analyzing time-to-event data, making it indispensable in clinical trials, epidemiological studies, and reliability engineering. By estimating survival probabilities, researchers can evaluate treatment effectiveness,...
79
Introduction To Survival Analysis01:18

Introduction To Survival Analysis

162
Survival analysis is a statistical method used to study time-to-event data, where the "event" might represent outcomes like death, disease relapse, system failure, or recovery. A unique feature of survival data is censoring, which occurs when the event of interest has not been observed for some individuals during the study period. This requires specialized techniques to handle incomplete data effectively.
The primary goal of survival analysis is to estimate survival time—the time...
162
Assumptions of Survival Analysis01:15

Assumptions of Survival Analysis

84
Survival models analyze the time until one or more events occur, such as death in biological organisms or failure in mechanical systems. These models are widely used across fields like medicine, biology, engineering, and public health to study time-to-event phenomena. To ensure accurate results, survival analysis relies on key assumptions and careful study design.
84

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

HERZCHECK: Early Detection of Subclinical Preheart Failure Using Mobile Cardiac Magnetic Resonance and Telemedicine in Rural and Underressourced Regions.

Circulation. Heart failure·2026
Same author

Design, simulate, refine: simulation-guided clinical trials for accelerated drug development.

Nature reviews. Drug discovery·2026
Same author

Optimizing Clinical Study Designs for CAR-T Cell Therapy: Development of an Efficient Sampling Strategy Through Optimal Experimental Design.

CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology·2026
Same author

Impact of Information Leakage in Platform Trials With Survival Endpoints on Type I Error Control.

Pharmaceutical statistics·2026
Same author

Availability of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) and hospital survival in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction related cardiogenic shock (STEMI-CS).

European heart journal. Acute cardiovascular care·2026
Same author

Stem-Cell-Derived Biologic Ventricular Assist Tissue in Heart Failure.

The New England journal of medicine·2026

Related Experiment Video

Updated: May 27, 2025

Establishing a Competing Risk Regression Nomogram Model for Survival Data
04:57

Establishing a Competing Risk Regression Nomogram Model for Survival Data

Published on: October 23, 2020

10.1K

A Comparison of Statistical Methods for Time-To-Event Analyses in Randomized Controlled Trials Under Non-Proportional

Florian Klinglmüller1, Tobias Fellinger1, Franz König2

  • 1Austrian Agency for Health and Food Safety, Vienna, Austria.

Statistics in Medicine
|February 20, 2025
PubMed
Summary

Choosing statistical analysis for non-proportional hazards (NPH) in clinical trials involves a trade-off between power and interpretability. Weighted log-rank tests offer power but lack clear treatment effect estimates, while restricted mean survival time (RMST) is interpretable but less powerful.

Keywords:
clinical trialnon‐proportional hazardssurvival analysis

More Related Videos

Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting Propensity Score using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index
06:55

Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting Propensity Score using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index

Published on: January 8, 2020

14.3K
An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model
05:37

An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model

Published on: September 16, 2022

2.0K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: May 27, 2025

Establishing a Competing Risk Regression Nomogram Model for Survival Data
04:57

Establishing a Competing Risk Regression Nomogram Model for Survival Data

Published on: October 23, 2020

10.1K
Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting Propensity Score using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index
06:55

Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting Propensity Score using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index

Published on: January 8, 2020

14.3K
An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model
05:37

An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model

Published on: September 16, 2022

2.0K

Area of Science:

  • Biostatistics
  • Clinical Trial Methodology
  • Survival Analysis

Background:

  • Established time-to-event methods assume proportional hazards, but non-proportional hazards (NPH) present analytical challenges.
  • No consensus exists on optimal inferential approaches for NPH in clinical trials.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To evaluate and recommend statistical analysis methods for clinical trials with expected non-proportional hazards.
  • To compare various parametric and non-parametric methods under diverse NPH scenarios.

Main Methods:

  • Simulation study assessing type I error, power, and confidence interval coverage.
  • Evaluated weighted log-rank tests, MaxCombo test, restricted mean survival time (RMST), average hazard ratios, milestone survival probabilities, and accelerated failure time models.
  • Scenarios included delayed treatment effects, crossing hazards, subgroup variations, and post-progression hazard changes.

Main Results:

  • Weighted log-rank tests showed high power but lacked interpretable treatment effect estimates.
  • Non-parametric methods like RMST difference offered interpretability but generally had lower power.
  • Model-based methods demonstrated higher power but risked biased estimates and poor confidence interval coverage.

Conclusions:

  • A clear trade-off exists between statistical power and interpretability for NPH analysis.
  • The choice of method depends on trial objectives, balancing the need for precise estimates with ease of interpretation.
  • Further research may be needed to develop methods that offer both high power and clear interpretability under NPH.