Hazard ratio from treatment and comparator hazards

Divides the treatment-group hazard by the comparator-group hazard at the same time. A value below 1 means a lower hazard of the named event in the treatment group.

Signature

HR = h_T / h_C
Inputs
InputsDefinitionUnit
h_TInstantaneous event rate among treated people still at risk at time tevents per person per unit of time
h_CInstantaneous event rate among comparator people still at risk at time t, greater than zeroevents per person per unit of time
Output
HRRatio of the treatment hazard to the comparator hazard at the same timeratio, no unit

Function

Relative hazard function

Maps the hazards of an event in a treatment group and a comparator group at the same time t to their ratio. Under proportional hazards the ratio is constant over time, and it can then be applied to a baseline survival curve or a baseline transition probability to obtain absolute outcomes for the treatment group.

Try this function

Implementations

  • Excel

    Hazard ratio from two named hazards

    Excel divides the treatment hazard by the comparator hazard and returns #N/A when the comparator hazard is not positive.

    =IF(ComparatorHazard>0,TreatmentHazard/ComparatorHazard,NA())

Assumptions

  • Hazards compared at the same time and on the same event

    Both hazards refer to the same event definition, time origin and analysis population, and are measured at the same time since the origin.

  • Proportional hazards when one ratio summarises follow-up

    Reporting a single HR for the whole follow-up assumes that the ratio is constant over time. The NICE manual states that the assumption should always be assessed, preferably with log-cumulative hazard plots.

Worked examples

  • Constant hazards of 0.07 and 0.10 per year

    With illustrative constant hazards of 0.07 per year on treatment and 0.10 per year on the comparator, HR = 0.07 / 0.10 = 0.70, as in the article.

    h_T = 0.07; h_C = 0.10; HR = 0.70

Common errors

  • Reading a hazard ratio as a relative risk

    An HR of 0.70 is a 30% lower hazard, not a 30% lower probability of the event. In the article's two-year example the relative risk is about 0.72 and the odds ratio about 0.68, so the three measures differ even with constant hazards.

  • Giving period-specific hazard ratios a causal reading

    People still at risk later in follow-up have been selected by earlier events, so an HR for a later period compares groups that may no longer be balanced, even in a randomised trial.

Sources

  • Hazard ratios under the proportional hazards model

    Bradburn MJ, Clark TG, Love SB, Altman DG. Survival analysis part II: multivariate data analysis, an introduction to concepts and methods. British Journal of Cancer. 2003;89(3):431-436. Section on the Cox proportional hazards model (the hazard in any group is a constant multiple of the hazard in any other; exp(b) is the hazard ratio).

    View source →

  • Built-in selection bias of period-specific hazard ratios

    Hernán MA. The hazards of hazard ratios. Epidemiology. 2010;21(1):13-15.

    View source →

Canonical Identity

Stable URI · Machine-readable · Resolvable · CC BY 4.0