Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2024 Sep;33(9):e5885.
doi: 10.1002/pds.5885.

Hazard Ratios and Alternative Effect Measures: An Applied Illustration

Affiliations
Review

Hazard Ratios and Alternative Effect Measures: An Applied Illustration

Chase D Latour et al. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2024 Sep.

Abstract

Purpose: Although the limitations of hazard ratios (HRs) for quantifying treatment effects in right-censored data have been widely discussed, HRs are still preferentially reported over other, more interpretable effect measures. This may stem from the fact that there are few applied examples that directly contrast the HR and its interpretation with alternative effect measures.

Methods: We analyzed data from two randomized clinical trials comparing panitumumab plus standard-of-care chemotherapy (SOCC) with SOCC alone as first- and second-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer. We report the effect of treatment with panitumumab on progression-free survival (PFS) using a Cox proportional hazards model to estimate the HR and the Kaplan-Meier estimator of cumulative incidence (risk). Further analyses included examining the cumulative incidence curves; kernel-smoothed, non-parametric hazards curves; fitting the Cox model with a continuous time variable; and estimating restricted mean survival as well as median survival.

Results: The HR was 0.82 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.71, 0.93), while the risk ratio (or relative risk [i.e., ratio of the cumulative incidence among the treated versus comparator]) was 0.99 (95% CI: 0.96, 1.02). These two measures suggest apparently different conclusions: either a treatment benefit or no effect. Through subsequent analyses, we demonstrated that, while the cumulative incidence of the outcome was similar by the end of follow-up regardless of treatment, the panitumumab treated group experienced longer PFS than those randomized to SOCC. Substantial nonproportional hazards were evident with panitumumab treatment reducing the hazard of progression/mortality during the first ~1.75 years but associated with an increased hazard of progress/mortality thereafter.

Discussion: This example underscores the difficulties in interpreting HRs, particularly in the setting of qualitative violations of proportional hazards, and the value of quantifying treatment effects via multiple effect measures.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

References

    1. A. Sashegyi and D. Ferry, “On the Interpretation of the Hazard Ratio and Communication of Survival Benefit,” Oncologist 22, no. 4 (2017): 484–486, https://doi.org/10.1634/theoncologist.2016‐0198.
    1. M. A. Hernán, “The Hazards of Hazard Ratios,” Epidemiology 21, no. 1 (2010): 13–15, https://doi.org/10.1097/EDE.0b013e3181c1ea43.
    1. O. O. Aalen, R. J. Cook, and K. Røysland, “Does Cox Analysis of a Randomized Survival Study Yield a Causal Treatment Effect?” Lifetime Data Analysis 21, no. 4 (2015): 579–593, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10985‐015‐9335‐y.
    1. T. Martinussen, S. Vansteelandt, and P. K. Andersen, “Subtleties in the Interpretation of Hazard Contrasts,” Lifetime Data Analysis 26, no. 4 (2020): 833–855, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10985‐020‐09501‐5.
    1. M. J. Stensrud, J. M. Aalen, O. O. Aalen, and M. Valberg, “Limitations of Hazard Ratios in Clinical Trials,” European Heart Journal 40, no. 17 (2019): 1378–1383, https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehy770.

Publication types

MeSH terms

Substances

LinkOut - more resources