Statistical analyses
tumor
TUMOR
Efficacy data were analyzed using all randomized patients and randomized patients with tumor PD-L1 expression level of 1% or more, and safety data were analyzed using all patients who received the study drug at least once.DFS was analyzed using the unstratified log-rank test and an overall type I error of 2.5% (two-sided) for between-group comparisons in each patient population (all randomized patients and patients with tumor PD-L1 expression of 1% or more). The HRs and corresponding CIs for DFS and NUTRFS were estimated using the unstratified Cox proportional hazard model. DFS curves were plotted using the Kaplan–Meier (KM) method, and the median DFS with 95% CI (two-sided) was calculated using double-logarithmic conversion.The EORTC QLQ-C30 scores all scales and single items on a categorical scale with a linear transformation to a 0–100 scale. Higher scores on the Global Health Status scale represent higher levels of global health status. For the EORTC QLQ-C30 scale, a score difference of 10 is considered to be a clinically important difference (CheckMate 274 was not prospectively designed to detect differences between the treatment groups among Japanese patients.