Paper detail

Testing for sufficient follow-up in survival data with a cure fraction

In order to estimate the proportion of `immune' or `cured' subjects who will never experience failure, a sufficiently long follow-up period is required. Several statistical tests have been proposed in the literature for assessing the assumption of sufficient follow-up, meaning that the study duration is longer than the support of the survival times for the uncured subjects. These tests do not perform satisfactorily, especially in terms of Type I error. In addition, they are constructed based on the assumption that the survival time for the uncured subjects has a compact support, i.e. the existence of a `cure time'. However, for practical purposes, the assumption of `cure time' is not realistic and the follow-up would be considered sufficiently long if the probability for the event to happen after the end of the study is very small. Based on this observation, we formulate a more relaxed notion of `practically' sufficient follow-up characterized by the quantiles of the distribution and develop a novel nonparametric statistical test. The proposed method relies mainly on the assumption of a non-increasing density function in the tail of the distribution. The test is then based on a shape constrained density estimator such as the Grenander or the kernel smoothed Grenander estimator and a bootstrap procedure is used for computation of the critical values. The performance of the test is investigated through an extensive simulation study, and the method is illustrated on breast cancer data.

preprint2026arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.