Let us look at why the results have been misinterpreted.

The 95% CI for the hazard ratio is 0.49-1.04: thus we are 95% confident that the true hazard ratio lies within these limits.

That is all the 95% CI tells us. It does not tell us how likely it is that a survival benefit exists (or does not exist). Thus the authors make an erroneous conclusion because the tools they used could not answer their question.