Investigations of methods for multiple time-to-event endpoints: A chronic myeloid leukemia data analysis

被引:1
|
作者
Wu, Hongji [1 ]
Hou, Yawen [2 ]
Chen, Zheng [1 ]
机构
[1] Southern Med Univ, Guangdong Prov Key Lab Trop Dis Res, Sch Publ Hlth, Dept Biostat, Guangzhou 510515, Peoples R China
[2] Jinan Univ, Sch Econ, Dept Stat, Guangzhou 510632, Peoples R China
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
clinical importance; composite endpoint; hazard ratio; multiple endpoints; single endpoint; win ratio; HAZARD RATIOS; WIN RATIO; RISKS;
D O I
10.1111/jep.13752
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background In randomized controlled trials, multiple time-to-event endpoints are commonly used to determine treatment effects. However, choosing an appropriate method to address multiple endpoints, according to different purposes of clinical practice, is a challenge for researchers. Methods We applied single endpoint, composite endpoint and win ratio analysis to chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) data to illustrate the distinctions with different multiple endpoints, including relapse, recovery and death after transplantation. Results Regarding relapse and death, the hazard ratio in single endpoint analysis (HRs) were 1.281 (95% CI: 1.061-1.546) and hazard ratio in composite endpoint analysis (HRc) were 1.286 (95% CI: 1.112-1.486) and 1/WR (win ratio) was 1.292 (95% CI: 1.115-1.497) indicated a similar negative effect for non-prophylaxis patients. However, when considering recovery and death, the corresponding HRs = 1.280 (95% CI: 1.056-1.552) may not be enough to describe the effect on death with nonproportional hazards (p < 0.05), and for the composite endpoint analysis, the HRc = 0.828 (95% CI: 0.740-0.926) cannot quantify and interpret the clinical effect on the composite endpoint with the combination of recovery and death, while the 1/WR = 1.351 (95% CI: 1.207-1.513) showed an unfavourable effect for non-prophylaxis patients Conclusions When dealing with multiple endpoints, single endpoints, researchers may choose single endpoints, composite endpoints and WR analysis due to different clinical applications and purposes. However, both single and composite endpoint analyses are hazard-based measures, and thus, the proportional hazards assumption should be considered. Moreover, composite endpoint analysis should be applied for endpoints with similar clinical meanings but not opposing implications. Win ratio analysis can be considered for different clinical importance of multiple endpoints, but the meaning of 'winner' needs to be specified for desired or undesired endpoints.
引用
收藏
页码:211 / 217
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Analysis of a composite endpoint with longitudinal and time-to-event data
    Tseng, Chi-hong
    Wong, Weng Kee
    STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2011, 30 (09) : 1018 - 1027
  • [42] Designing phase II studies in cancer with time-to-event endpoints
    Owzar, Kouros
    Jung, Sin-Ho
    CLINICAL TRIALS, 2008, 5 (03) : 209 - 221
  • [43] Evaluating time-to-event surrogates for time-to-event true endpoints: an information-theoretic approach based on causal inference
    Stijven, Florian
    Molenberghs, Geert
    Van Keilegom, Ingrid
    van der Elst, Wim
    Alonso, Ariel
    LIFETIME DATA ANALYSIS, 2025, 31 (01) : 1 - 23
  • [44] Evaluating principal surrogate endpoints with time-to-event data accounting for time-varying treatment efficacy
    Gabriel, Erin E.
    Gilbert, Peter B.
    BIOSTATISTICS, 2014, 15 (02) : 251 - 265
  • [45] Competing risks analysis for discrete time-to-event data
    Schmid, Matthias
    Berger, Moritz
    WILEY INTERDISCIPLINARY REVIEWS-COMPUTATIONAL STATISTICS, 2021, 13 (05)
  • [46] Network Meta-Analysis of Time-to-Event Endpoints With Individual Participant Data Using Restricted Mean Survival Time Regression
    Hua, Kaiyuan
    Wang, Xiaofei
    Hong, Hwanhee
    BIOMETRICAL JOURNAL, 2025, 67 (01)
  • [47] Sensitivity Analysis for Withdrawals in Grouped Time-to-Event Data
    Zhao, Yue
    Preisser, John S.
    Koch, Gary G.
    STATISTICS IN BIOPHARMACEUTICAL RESEARCH, 2014, 6 (01): : 41 - 54
  • [48] Adaptive Designs for Two Candidate Primary Time-to-Event Endpoints
    Rauch, Geraldine
    Schuler, Svenja
    Wirths, Marius
    Englert, Stefan
    Kieser, Meinhard
    STATISTICS IN BIOPHARMACEUTICAL RESEARCH, 2016, 8 (02): : 207 - 216
  • [49] Treatment effect quantification for time-to-event endpoints-Estimands, analysis strategies, and beyond
    Rufibach, Kaspar
    PHARMACEUTICAL STATISTICS, 2019, 18 (02) : 145 - 165
  • [50] Characterization of Dasatinib Exposure-Efficacy Relationship for Patients with Chronic Myeloid Leukemia (CML) Using Interval Censored Time-To-Event (TTE) Analysis
    Wang, Xiaoning
    Manos, George
    Kroog, Glenn
    Roy, Amit
    JOURNAL OF PHARMACOKINETICS AND PHARMACODYNAMICS, 2014, 41 : S62 - S62