Literature DB >> 18926145

Determining the most appropriate components for a composite clinical trial outcome.

M Angelyn Bethel1, Rury Holman, Steven M Haffner, Robert M Califf, Alice Huntsman-Labed, Tsushung A Hua, John McMurray.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Because composite end points augment event rates, they are often thought to increase statistical power. This may not be true if the intervention has a lesser effect on some components of the composite. Consequently, treatment effect size may depend on the choice of composite.
METHODS: To explore this issue, we performed a meta-analysis to determine the effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers on individual cardiovascular (CV) outcomes. We then applied these treatment effects to 2 different composite CV outcomes generated using blinded data from the ongoing Nateglinide and Valsartan in Impaired Glucose Tolerance (IGT) Outcomes Research (NAVIGATOR) trial and analyzed them on a time-to-first-event basis. The composites were CV death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or hospitalization for heart failure and an "extended" composite that included hospitalization for angina and coronary revascularization.
RESULTS: The odds reductions due to angiotensin-converting enzyme/angiotensin receptor blocker treatment estimated from the meta-analysis were as follows: CV death: 13%, P < .0001; nonfatal myocardial infarction: 16%, P < .00001; nonfatal stroke: 14%, P = .006; heart failure: 28%, P < .00001; hospitalization for angina: 7%, P = .02; and revascularization: 5%, P = .17. For the CV composites, the projected odds reduction was larger (17.8%, 95% CI 0.452-1.189) for the narrower composite compared with the extended CV composite (11.7%, 95% CI 0.623-1.136); that is, use of the extended composite reduced power to detect a difference between treatment groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Although the use of CV composites augments event rates, it may not increase statistical power. Inclusion of events little influenced by an intervention may reduce the precision of the composite end point and mask treatment effects.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18926145     DOI: 10.1016/j.ahj.2008.05.018

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am Heart J        ISSN: 0002-8703            Impact factor:   4.749


  11 in total

Review 1.  Impact of FDA guidance for developing diabetes drugs on trial design: from policy to practice.

Authors:  M Angelyn Bethel; Harald Sourij
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 2.931

2.  Heart failure: acute ischemic events in HF--should we include sudden death?

Authors:  John J V McMurray
Journal:  Nat Rev Cardiol       Date:  2011-02-22       Impact factor: 32.419

3.  Opportunities and challenges of clinical trials in cardiology using composite primary endpoints.

Authors:  Geraldine Rauch; Bernhard Rauch; Svenja Schüler; Meinhard Kieser
Journal:  World J Cardiol       Date:  2015-01-26

Review 4.  Are all outcomes in chronic heart failure rated equally? An argument for a patient-centred approach to outcome assessment.

Authors:  Sungwon Chang; Phillip J Newton; Sally Inglis; Tim Luckett; Henry Krum; Peter Macdonald; Patricia M Davidson
Journal:  Heart Fail Rev       Date:  2014-03       Impact factor: 4.214

5.  Conflicts among multinational ethical and scientific standards for clinical trials of therapeutic interventions.

Authors:  Jacob M Kolman; Nelda P Wray; Carol M Ashton; Danielle M Wenner; Anna F Jarman; Baruch A Brody
Journal:  J Law Med Ethics       Date:  2012       Impact factor: 1.718

6.  Misspecification of Cox regression models with composite endpoints.

Authors:  Longyang Wu; Richard J Cook
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2012-06-27       Impact factor: 2.373

Review 7.  The central mechanism underlying hypertension: a review of the roles of sodium ions, epithelial sodium channels, the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system, oxidative stress and endogenous digitalis in the brain.

Authors:  Hakuo Takahashi; Masamichi Yoshika; Yutaka Komiyama; Masato Nishimura
Journal:  Hypertens Res       Date:  2011-08-04       Impact factor: 3.872

8.  Cardiovascular Outcomes Trials in Type 2 Diabetes: Where Do We Go From Here? Reflections From a Diabetes Care Editors' Expert Forum.

Authors:  William T Cefalu; Sanjay Kaul; Hertzel C Gerstein; Rury R Holman; Bernard Zinman; Jay S Skyler; Jennifer B Green; John B Buse; Silvio E Inzucchi; Lawrence A Leiter; Itamar Raz; Julio Rosenstock; Matthew C Riddle
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2018-01       Impact factor: 19.112

Review 9.  Cardiovascular outcome trials for anti-diabetes medication: A holy grail of drug development?

Authors:  Mathew John; Ambika Gopalakrishnan Unnikrishnan; Sanjay Kalra; Tiny Nair
Journal:  Indian Heart J       Date:  2016-04-11

10.  Win Ratio -An Intuitive and Easy-To-Interpret Composite Outcome in Medical Studies.

Authors:  Hongyue Wang; Jing Peng; Juila Z Zheng; Bokai Wang; Xiang Lu; Chongshu Chen; Xin M Tu; Changyong Feng
Journal:  Shanghai Arch Psychiatry       Date:  2017-02-25
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.