» Articles » PMID: 26353896

Large Sample Inference for a Win Ratio Analysis of a Composite Outcome Based on Prioritized Components

Overview
Journal Biostatistics
Specialty Public Health
Date 2015 Sep 11
PMID 26353896
Citations 28
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Composite outcomes are common in clinical trials, especially for multiple time-to-event outcomes (endpoints). The standard approach that uses the time to the first outcome event has important limitations. Several alternative approaches have been proposed to compare treatment versus control, including the proportion in favor of treatment and the win ratio. Herein, we construct tests of significance and confidence intervals in the context of composite outcomes based on prioritized components using the large sample distribution of certain multivariate multi-sample U-statistics. This non-parametric approach provides a general inference for both the proportion in favor of treatment and the win ratio, and can be extended to stratified analyses and the comparison of more than two groups. The proposed methods are illustrated with time-to-event outcomes data from a clinical trial.

Citing Articles

Regularized win ratio regression for variable selection and risk prediction, with an application to a cardiovascular trial.

Mao L Res Sq. 2025; .

PMID: 39975895 PMC: 11838725. DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-5836301/v1.


Combined endurance and resistance exercise training in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: a randomized controlled trial.

Edelmann F, Wachter R, Duvinage A, Mueller S, Fegers-Wustrow I, Schwarz S Nat Med. 2025; 31(1):306-314.

PMID: 39747684 PMC: 11750725. DOI: 10.1038/s41591-024-03342-7.


Benefit of Avasopasem Manganese on Severe Oral Mucositis in Head and Neck Cancer in the ROMAN Trial: Unplanned Secondary Analysis.

Anderson C, Salvaggio S, De Backer M, Chiem J, Walker G, Saunders D Adv Radiat Oncol. 2024; 10(1):101674.

PMID: 39678920 PMC: 11638593. DOI: 10.1016/j.adro.2024.101674.


The Win Ratio Approach in Bayesian Monitoring for Two-Arm Phase II Clinical Trial Designs With Multiple Time-To-Event Endpoints.

Huang X, Wang J, Ning J Stat Med. 2024; 43(30):5922-5934.

PMID: 39582325 PMC: 11645213. DOI: 10.1002/sim.10282.


Defining estimand for the win ratio: Separate the true effect from censoring.

Mao L Clin Trials. 2024; 21(5):584-594.

PMID: 39076157 PMC: 11502278. DOI: 10.1177/17407745241259356.


References
1.
Huque M, Alosh M, Bhore R . Addressing multiplicity issues of a composite endpoint and its components in clinical trials. J Biopharm Stat. 2011; 21(4):610-34. DOI: 10.1080/10543406.2011.551327. View

2.
Buyse M . Generalized pairwise comparisons of prioritized outcomes in the two-sample problem. Stat Med. 2010; 29(30):3245-57. DOI: 10.1002/sim.3923. View

3.
Kirtane A, Leon M . The Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valve (PARTNER) trial: clinical trialist perspective. Circulation. 2012; 125(25):3229-32. DOI: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.112.093070. View

4.
Claggett B, Wei L, Pfeffer M . Moving beyond our comfort zone. Eur Heart J. 2013; 34(12):869-71. DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehs485. View

5.
Alosh M, Bretz F, Huque M . Advanced multiplicity adjustment methods in clinical trials. Stat Med. 2013; 33(4):693-713. DOI: 10.1002/sim.5974. View