Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
According to long-term follow-up data of malignant tumor patients, assessing treatment effects requires careful consideration of competing risks. The commonly used cause-specific hazard ratio (CHR) and sub-distribution hazard ratio (SHR) are relative indicators and may present challenges in terms of proportional hazards assumption and clinical interpretation. Recently, the restricted mean time lost (RMTL) has been recommended as a supplementary measure for better clinical interpretation. Moreover, for observational study data in epidemiological and clinical settings, due to the influence of confounding factors, covariate adjustment is crucial for determining the causal effect of treatment. We construct an RMTL estimator after adjusting for covariates based on the inverse probability weighting method, and derive the variance to construct interval estimates based on the large sample properties. We use simulation studies to study the statistical performance of this estimator in various scenarios. In addition, we further consider the changes in treatment effects over time, constructing a dynamic RMTL difference curve and corresponding confidence bands for the curve. The simulation results demonstrate that the adjusted RMTL estimator exhibits smaller biases compared with unadjusted RMTL and provides robust interval estimates in all scenarios. This method was applied to a real-world cervical cancer patient data, revealing improvements in the prognosis of patients with small cell carcinoma of the cervix. The results showed that the protective effect of surgery was significant only in the first 20 months, but the long-term effect was not obvious. Radiotherapy significantly improved patient outcomes during the follow-up period from 17 to 57 months, while radiotherapy combined with chemotherapy significantly improved patient outcomes throughout the entire period. We propose the approach that is easy to interpret and implement for assessing treatment effects in observational competing risk data.
Shen et al. (Mon,) studied this question.