ReviewNature aging2026
Hierarchical endpoints and win statistics for geromedicine trials.
Review in Nature aging, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Geroscience has advanced rapidly, yet its clinical translation remains limited. A central barrier is the lack of trial outcomes that capture the multidimensional effects of geroprotective interventions while meeting clinical and regulatory standards. Mortality is objective and regulatorily salient but often impractical. By contrast, surrogate measures of healthspan improve feasibility and may better reflect the quality of extended life, but they are generally considered soft endpoints that require further validation. Here, we propose hierarchical composite endpoints using time-to-worst-event analysis as a pragmatic and scientifically sound compromise. Participant pairs are compared using win statistics according to a prespecified clinical hierarchy, in which more severe and objective clinical events are prioritized, while health surrogates and biomarkers contribute information at lower tiers. When outcome selection, ordering and tie rules are clinically and mechanistically justified and agreed with regulators, this approach may improve geromedicine trial efficiency and allow overall treatment effects to be captured without compromising clinical priorities.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42342910What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.