Meta‐Analysis of Median Survival Times With Inverse‐Variance Weighting

We consider the problem of meta-analyzing outcome measures based on median survival times. Primary studies with time-to-event outcomes often report estimates of median survival times and confidence intervals based on the Kaplan-Meier estimator. However, outcome measures based on median survival are rarely meta-analyzed, as standard inverse-variance weighted methods require within-study standard errors that are typically not reported. In this article, we consider an inverse-variance weighted approach to meta-analyze median survival times that estimates the within-study standard errors from the reported confidence intervals. We show that this method consistently estimates the standard error of median survival when applied to confidence intervals constructed by the Brookmeyer-Crowley method. We conduct a series of simulation studies evaluating the performance of this approach at the study level (i.e., for estimating the standard error of median survival) and the meta-analytic level (i.e., for estimating the pooled median, difference of medians, and ratio of medians) for commonly used confidence intervals for median survival, including the Brookmeyer-Crowley method and nonparametric bootstrap. We find that this approach often performs comparably to a benchmark approach that uses the true within-study standard errors for meta-analyzing median-based outcome measures when within-study sample sizes are moderately large (e.g., above 50). However, when the effective sample sizes are small, the method can yield biased estimates of within-study standard errors. We illustrate an application of this approach in a meta-analysis evaluating survival benefits of being assigned to experimental arms versus comparator arms in randomized trials for non-small cell lung cancer therapies.