Model-Free Survival Fragility Restores Robustness in Clinical Trials Reporting the Survival-Inferred Fragility Index

Authors

  • Thomas F Heston Department of Family Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, USA; Department of Medical Education and Clinical Sciences, Elson S. Floyd College of Medicine, Washington State University, Spokane, USA https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5655-2512

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20484369

Keywords:

survival fragility, robustness in clinical trials, neutrality boundary framework, survival-inferred fragility index, p-fr-nb, model-free statistics, oncology trial methodology, hazard ratio

Abstract

The Survival-Inferred Fragility Index (SIFI), introduced in 2020 and now applied to first-line metastatic renal cell carcinoma immunotherapy trials, extends the fragility concept into time-to-event oncology outcomes by iteratively reassigning long-surviving patients between trial arms until statistical significance is lost. This reassignment rule is model-dependent: the choice of which survivors to move and in what order embeds distributional assumptions about the survival tail, so SIFI values are path-dependent and therefore have limited cross-trial comparability. The Survival Fragility Quotient, derived from the Cox regression z-statistic and paired with the Survival Robustness Quotient on the neutrality boundary, provides a model-free survival fragility measure without iterative reassignment, requires only the reported hazard ratio and its confidence interval, and completes the p–fr–nb triplet for time-to-event outcomes. Oncology randomized trial reporting should adopt the model-free pair to support cross-trial comparability of the quality of survival evidence.

References

1. Bomze D, Asher N, Hasan Ali O, Flatz L, Azoulay D, Markel G, et al. Survival-Inferred Fragility Index of Phase 3 Clinical Trials Evaluating Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors. JAMA Netw Open. 2020;3: e2017675. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.17675

2. Meirson T, Mutti L, Goldstein DA, Barkan T, Mutai R, Markel G, et al. Comparative and Critical Analysis of Immune-based Combinations for First-line Treatment of Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma. Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2026; 102561. doi:10.1016/j.clgc.2026.102561

3. Walsh M, Srinathan SK, McAuley DF, Mrkobrada M, Levine O, Ribic C, et al. The statistical significance of randomized controlled trial results is frequently fragile: a case for a Fragility Index. J Clin Epidemiol. 2014;67: 622–628. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.10.019

4. Caldwell J-ME, Youssefzadeh K, Limpisvasti O. A method for calculating the fragility index of continuous outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol. 2021;136: 20-25. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.02.023

5. Heston TF. The Continuous Fragility Quotient as a Model-Free Assessment for Continuous Outcomes. Internet Med J. 2026;1: e19445024–e19445024. doi:10.5281/zenodo.19445024

6. Heston TF. The Neutrality Boundary Framework: Quantifying Statistical Robustness Geometrically. arXiv. 2025; 2511.00982. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2511.00982

7. Heston TF. Significance, Fragility, and Robustness in Clinical Trials: Stratifying Statistical Evidence. Cureus. 2025;17. doi:10.7759/cureus.100494

Downloads

Published

2026-06-01

How to Cite

Heston, T. F. (2026). Model-Free Survival Fragility Restores Robustness in Clinical Trials Reporting the Survival-Inferred Fragility Index. Internet Medical Journal, 1(1), e20484369. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20484369

Issue

Section

Articles