Table 3.

Comparison of OS rates and median OS

ZUMA-1SCHOLAR-1Ratio
12-mo OS rate (95% CI), %* 71 (46-91) 26 (22-32) 2.7 (1.7-3.8) 
18-mo OS rate (95% CI), %* 60 (37-83) 23 (19-29) 2.6 (1.5-3.9) 
24-mo OS rate (95% CI), %* 54 (30-80) 20 (16-26) 2.7 (1.4-4.3) 
Median OS (95% CI), mo* 31.0 (11.5-NE) 5.4 (4.6-6.3) 25.6 (6.0-NE) 
Treatment difference, HR (95% CI) 0.27 (0.00-0.38)
(73% reduction in the risk of death) 
 
ZUMA-1SCHOLAR-1Ratio
12-mo OS rate (95% CI), %* 71 (46-91) 26 (22-32) 2.7 (1.7-3.8) 
18-mo OS rate (95% CI), %* 60 (37-83) 23 (19-29) 2.6 (1.5-3.9) 
24-mo OS rate (95% CI), %* 54 (30-80) 20 (16-26) 2.7 (1.4-4.3) 
Median OS (95% CI), mo* 31.0 (11.5-NE) 5.4 (4.6-6.3) 25.6 (6.0-NE) 
Treatment difference, HR (95% CI) 0.27 (0.00-0.38)
(73% reduction in the risk of death) 
 

HR, hazard ratio; NE, not estimable.

*

To control for confounding, the treatment-specific survival functions were obtained using augmented inverse-probability weighted complete-case estimators24  on the common support set for survival (ZUMA-1, N = 81; SCHOLAR-1, N = 331).

Difference between the 2 studies.

Stratification with regression-adjustment hazard ratio estimator on common support set for survival (ZUMA-1, N = 81; SCHOLAR-1, N = 331). This estimator was applied to the sensitivity common support set at 1 year and produced with similar results to the 1-year propensity–balanced analysis (data on file); however, it was not applied to the sensitivity common support set at 2 years.

Close Modal

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal