DeepAI AI Chat
Log In Sign Up

Utilizing Win Ratio Approaches and Two-Stage Enrichment Designs for Small-Sized Clinical Trials

by   Jialu Wang, et al.

Conventional methods for analyzing composite endpoints in clinical trials often only focus on the time to the first occurrence of all events in the composite. Therefore, they have inherent limitations because the individual patients' first event can be the outcome of lesser clinical importance. To overcome this limitation, the concept of the win ratio (WR), which accounts for the relative priorities of the components and gives appropriate priority to the more clinically important event, was examined. For example, because mortality has a higher priority than hospitalization, it is reasonable to give a higher priority when obtaining the WR. In this paper, we evaluate three innovative WR methods (stratified matched, stratified unmatched, and unstratified unmatched) for two and multiple components under binary and survival composite endpoints. We compare these methods to traditional ones, including the Cox regression, O'Brien's rank-sum-type test, and the contingency table for controlling study Type I error rate. We also incorporate these approaches into two-stage enrichment designs with the possibility of sample size adaptations to gain efficiency for rare disease studies.


page 1

page 2

page 3

page 4


Design of Trials with Composite Endpoints with the R Package CompAREdesign

Composite endpoints are widely used as primary endpoints in clinical tri...

Sample size derivation for composite binary endpoints

Composite binary endpoints are increasingly used as primary endpoints in...

Non-constant hazard ratios in randomized controlled trials with composite endpoints

The hazard ratio is routinely used as a summary measure to assess the tr...

Decision tool and Sample Size Calculator for Composite Endpoints

Summary points: - This article considers the combination of two binary...