Weighted win loss approach for analyzing prioritized outcomes

Statistics in Medicine

Volumn 36, Issue 15, 2017, Pages 2452-2465

  Luo, Xiaodong ^a   Qiu, Junshan ^b   Bai, Steven ^b   Tian, Hong ^c  

^a SANOFI   (France)

^b CENTER FOR DRUG EVALUATION AND RESEARCH   (United States)

^c JANSSEN RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT   (United States)

Author keywords

clinical trials; composite end points; contribution index; prioritized outcomes; variance estimation; weighted win ratio

Indexed keywords

DATA ANALYSIS; SIMULATION; STATISTICS; STUDY DESIGN; SURVIVAL ANALYSIS; ACUTE CORONARY SYNDROME; BIOASSAY; BIOSTATISTICS; CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); COMPUTER SIMULATION; CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; HUMAN; PROPORTIONAL HAZARDS MODEL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL MODEL; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

BLOOD CLOTTING FACTOR 10A INHIBITOR; DIPEPTIDYL CARBOXYPEPTIDASE INHIBITOR; RIVAROXABAN;

ACUTE CORONARY SYNDROME; ANGIOTENSIN-CONVERTING ENZYME INHIBITORS; BIOSTATISTICS; CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; COMPUTER SIMULATION; CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; ENDPOINT DETERMINATION; FACTOR XA INHIBITORS; HUMANS; MODELS, STATISTICAL; PROPORTIONAL HAZARDS MODELS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; RIVAROXABAN; SURVIVAL ANALYSIS; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 85017234526     PISSN: 02776715     EISSN: 10970258     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sim.7284     Document Type: Article

References (14)

1. Buyse M. Generalized pairwise comparisons of prioritized outcomes in the two-sample problem. Statistics in Medicine 2010; 29:3245–3257.
2. Pocock SJ, Ariti CA, Collier TJ, Wang D. The win ratio: a new approach to the analysis of composite endpoints in clinical trials based on clinical priorities. European Heart Journal 2012; 33(2):176–182.
3. Stolker JM, Spertus JA, Cohen DJ, Jones PG, Jain KK, Bamberger E, Lonergan BB, Chan PS. Re-thinking composite endpoints in clinical trials: insights from patients and trialists. Circulation 2014; 134:11–21.
4. Wang D, Pocock SJ. A win ratio approach to comparing continuous non-normal outcomes in clinical trials. Pharmaceutical Statistics 2016; 15:238–245.
5. Abdalla S, Montez-Rath M, Parfrey PS, Chertow GM. The win ratio approach to analyzing composite outcomes: an application to the EVOLVE trial. Contemporary Clinical Trials 2016; 48:119–124.
6. Luo X, Tian H, Mohanty S, Tsai WY. An alternative approach to confidence interval estimation for the win ratio statistic. Biometrics 2015; 71:139–145.
7. Bebu I, Lachin JM. Large sample inference for a win ratio analysis of a composite outcome based on prioritized components. Biostatistics 2016; 17:178–187.
8. Oakes D. On the win-ratio statistic in clinical trials with multiple types of event. Biometrika 2016; 103:742–745.
9. Fleming TR, Harrington DP. A class of hypothesis tests for one and two samples censored survival data. Communications in Statistics 1981; 10:763–794.
10. Giné E, Latała R, Zinn J. Exponential and moment inequalities for U-statistics. In High Dimensional Probability II. Progress in Probability, Vol. 47 Birkhäuser: Boston, MA, 2000.
11. Reynaud-Bouret P. Exponential inequalities, with constants, for U-statistics of order two. In Progress in Probability of Stochastic Inequalities and Applications, Vol. 56 Birkhäuser: Basel, Switzerland, 2003.
12. R Development Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing: Vienna, Austria, 2011. (Available at http://www.R-project.org/).
13. The PEACE Trial Investigators. Angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibition in stable coronary artery disease. New England Journal of Medicine 2004; 351:2058–2068.
14. Mega JL, Braunwald E, Wiviott SD, Bassand JP, Bhatt DL, Bode C, Burton P, Cohen M, Cook-Bruns N, Fox KAA, Goto S, Murphy SA, Plotnikov AN, Schneider D, Sun X, Verheugt FWA, Gibson CM, ATLAS ACS 2 TIMI 51 Investigators. Rivaroxaban in patients with a recent acute coronary syndrome. New England Journal of Medicine 2012; 366:9–19.