Literature DB >> 32974905

A class of proportional win-fractions regression models for composite outcomes.

Lu Mao1, Tuo Wang1.   

Abstract

The win ratio is gaining traction as a simple and intuitive approach to analysis of prioritized composite endpoints in clinical trials. To extend it from two-sample comparison to regression, we propose a novel class of semiparametric models that includes as special cases both the two-sample win ratio and the traditional Cox proportional hazards model on time to the first event. Under the assumption that the covariate-specific win and loss fractions are proportional over time, the regression coefficient is unrelated to the censoring distribution and can be interpreted as the log win ratio resulting from one-unit increase in the covariate. U-statistic estimating functions, in the form of an arbitrary covariate-specific weight process integrated by a pairwise residual process, are constructed to obtain consistent estimators for the regression parameter. The asymptotic properties of the estimators are derived using uniform weak convergence theory for U-processes. Visual inspection of a "score" process provides useful clues as to the plausibility of the proportionality assumption. Extensive numerical studies using both simulated and real data from a major cardiovascular trial show that the regression methods provide valid inference on covariate effects and outperform the two-sample win ratio in both efficiency and robustness. The proposed methodology is implemented in the R-package WR, publicly available from the Comprehensive R Archive Network (CRAN).
© 2020 The International Biometric Society.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Keywords: cardiovascular trials; U-processes; prioritized endpoints; probabilistic index models; proportionality assumption; win ratio

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32974905      PMCID: PMC7988303          DOI: 10.1111/biom.13382

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biometrics        ISSN: 0006-341X            Impact factor:   1.701


  14 in total

1.  Statistical principles for clinical trials (ICH E9): an introductory note on an international guideline.

Authors:  J A Lewis
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1999-08-15       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  Combining mortality and longitudinal measures in clinical trials.

Authors:  D M Finkelstein; D A Schoenfeld
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1999-06-15       Impact factor: 2.373

3.  Large sample inference for a win ratio analysis of a composite outcome based on prioritized components.

Authors:  Ionut Bebu; John M Lachin
Journal:  Biostatistics       Date:  2015-09-08       Impact factor: 5.899

4.  The inverse-probability-of-censoring weighting (IPCW) adjusted win ratio statistic: an unbiased estimator in the presence of independent censoring.

Authors:  Gaohong Dong; Lu Mao; Bo Huang; Margaret Gamalo-Siebers; Jiuzhou Wang; GuangLei Yu; David C Hoaglin
Journal:  J Biopharm Stat       Date:  2020-06-17       Impact factor: 1.051

5.  Graphing the Win Ratio and its components over time.

Authors:  Dianne M Finkelstein; David A Schoenfeld
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2018-09-11       Impact factor: 2.373

6.  Analysis of ordered composite endpoints.

Authors:  Dean Follmann; Michael P Fay; Toshimitsu Hamasaki; Scott Evans
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2019-12-19       Impact factor: 2.373

7.  An alternative approach to confidence interval estimation for the win ratio statistic.

Authors:  Xiaodong Luo; Hong Tian; Surya Mohanty; Wei Yann Tsai
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2014-08-25       Impact factor: 2.571

8.  Weighted win loss approach for analyzing prioritized outcomes.

Authors:  Xiaodong Luo; Junshan Qiu; Steven Bai; Hong Tian
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2017-03-26       Impact factor: 2.373

9.  The win ratio: a new approach to the analysis of composite endpoints in clinical trials based on clinical priorities.

Authors:  Stuart J Pocock; Cono A Ariti; Timothy J Collier; Duolao Wang
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2011-09-06       Impact factor: 29.983

10.  A win ratio approach to the re-analysis of Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial.

Authors:  Ales Kotalik; Anne Eaton; Qinshu Lian; Carlos Serrano; John Connett; James D Neaton
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2019-08-07       Impact factor: 2.486

View more
  4 in total

1.  Statistical models for composite endpoints of death and non-fatal events: a review.

Authors:  Lu Mao; KyungMann Kim
Journal:  Stat Biopharm Res       Date:  2021-07-06       Impact factor: 1.586

2.  On recurrent-event win ratio.

Authors:  Lu Mao; KyungMann Kim; Yi Li
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2022-03-29       Impact factor: 2.494

3.  On restricted mean time in favor of treatment.

Authors:  Lu Mao
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2021-09-25       Impact factor: 2.571

4.  Sample size formula for general win ratio analysis.

Authors:  Lu Mao; KyungMann Kim; Xinran Miao
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2021-06-08       Impact factor: 1.701

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.