Comparison of baseline covariate adjustment methods for restricted mean survival time.

The restricted mean survival time provides a straightforward clinical measure that dispenses with the need for proportional hazards assumptions. We focus on two strategies to directly model the survival time and adjust covariates. Firstly, pseudo-survival time is calculated for each subject using a leave-one-out approach, followed by a model analysis that adjusts for covariates using all pseudo-values. This method is used to reflect information of censored subjects in the model analysis. The second approach adjusts for covariates for those subjects with observed time-to-event while incorporating censored subjects using inverse probability of censoring weighting (IPCW). This paper evaluates these methods' power to detect group differences through computer simulations. We find the interpretation of pseudo-values challenging with the pseudo-survival time method and confirm that pseudo-survival times deviate from actual data in a primary biliary cholangitis clinical trial, mainly due to extensive censoring. Simulations reveal that the IPCW method is more robust, unaffected by the balance of censors, whereas pseudo-survival time is influenced by this balance. The IPCW method retains a nominal significance level for the type-1 error rate, even amidst group differences concerning censor incidence rates and covariates. Our study concludes that IPCW and pseudo-survival time methods differ significantly in handling censored data, impacting parameter estimations. Our findings suggest that the IPCW method provides more robust results than pseudo-survival time and is recommended, even when censor probabilities vary between treatment groups. However, pseudo-survival time remains a suitable choice when censoring probabilities are balanced.