Structural Limitations of Early–Late Treatment Comparisons Under Target Trial Emulation: A Simulation Study
Rattachement africain : jp. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
Early versus Late (E-L) treatment initiation comparisons, which are prone to immortal time bias, are widely considered amenable to causal inference through target trial emulation (TTE) using clone-censor-weighting (CCW). However, whether standard CCW yields a well-defined causal estimand for the E-L comparison under ideal implementation conditions has not been formally examined. We conducted a structural simulation study to evaluate CCW-based TTE for E-L comparisons. The design varied along three dimensions: treatment-initiation mechanisms (random versus baseline-confounded timing), benefit-harm structures governing delayed-treatment harm and post-treatment benefit, and five distinct E-L initiation-window configurations. We implemented CCW as conventionally recommended and summarized estimated 12-month marginal risk ratios across settings. Depending on the placement and structure of the initiation windows, estimated risk ratios exhibited systematic window-dependent variation, including direction reversals across window specifications, even in settings where the true marginal causal contrast was 1 by design. These patterns were not consistently explained by weight instability or lack of support overlap. Our findings indicate that, in E-L comparisons, the window-defined strategy contrast estimated using CCW-based TTE can be strongly shaped by risk accumulated before treatment initiation under the specified windows, underscoring the need for caution when interpreting E-L analyses.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Structural Limitations of Early–Late Treatment Comparisons Under Target Trial Emulation: A Simulation Study
- Date Crossref
- 28/08/2026
- Éditeur
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.