Prioritised endpoints for device-based hypertension trials: the win ratio methodology

被引:16
|
作者
Kandzari, David E. [1 ]
Hickey, Graeme L. [2 ]
Pocock, Stuart J. [3 ]
Weber, Michael A. [4 ]
Boehm, Michael [5 ]
Cohen, Sidney A. [2 ]
Fahy, Martin [2 ]
Lamberti, Giuseppina [2 ]
Mahfoud, Felix [5 ]
机构
[1] Piedmont Heart Inst, Dept Intervent Cardiol, Suite 2065,95 Collier Rd, Atlanta, GA 30309 USA
[2] Medtron PLC, Coronary & Struct Heart Div, Santa Rosa, CA USA
[3] London Sch Hyg & Trop Med, Dept Med Stat, London, England
[4] SUNY Downstate Coll Med, Dept Med, Brooklyn, NY USA
[5] Saarland Univ, Dept Internal Med 3, Klin Innere Med Kardiol Angiol Internist Intens M, Univ Klinikum Saarlandes, Homburg, Germany
关键词
clinical trials; renal sympathetic denervation; uncontrolled hypertension; GENERALIZED PAIRWISE COMPARISONS; RENAL DENERVATION; OUTCOMES; DESIGN; DRUGS;
D O I
10.4244/EIJ-D-20-01090
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Aims: Multiple endpoints with varying clinical relevance are available to establish the efficacy of device based treatments. Given the variance among blood pressure measures and medication changes in hypertension trials, we performed a win ratio analysis of outcomes in a sham-controlled, randomised trial of renal denervation (RDN) in patients with uncontrolled hypertension despite commonly prescribed antihypertensive medications. We propose a novel prioritised endpoint framework for determining the treatment benefit of RDN compared with sham control. Methods and results: We analysed the SPYRAL HTN-ON MED pilot study data using a prioritised hierarchical endpoint comprised of 24-hour mean ambulatory systolic blood pressure (SBP), office SBP, and medication burden. A generalised pairwise comparisons methodology (win ratio) was extended to examine this endpoint. Clinically relevant thresholds of 5 and 10 mmHg were used for comparisons of ambulatory and office SBP, respectively, and therefore to define treatment ?winners? and ?losers?. For a total number of 1,596 unmatched pairs, the RDN subject was the winner in 1,050 pairs, the RDN subject was the loser in 378 pairs, and 168 pairs were tied. The win ratio in favour of RDN was 2.78 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.58 to 5.48; p<0.001) and corresponding net benefit statistic was 0.42 (95% CI: 0.20 to 0.63). Sensitivity analyses performed with differing blood pressure thresholds and according to drug adherence testing demonstrated consistent results. Conclusions: The win ratio method addresses prior limitations by enabling inclusion of more patient oriented results while prioritising those endpoints considered most clinically important. Applying these methods to the SPYRAL HTN-ON MED pilot study (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02439775), RDN was determined to be superior regarding a hierarchical endpoint and a ?winner? compared with sham control patients. Methods and results: We analysed the SPYRAL HTN-ON MED pilot study data using a prioritised hierarchical endpoint comprised of 24-hour mean ambulatory systolic blood pressure (SBP), office SBP, and medication burden. A generalised pairwise comparisons methodology (win ratio) was extended to examine this endpoint. Clinically relevant thresholds of 5 and 10 mmHg were used for comparisons of ambulatory and office SBP, respectively, and therefore to define treatment ?winners? and ?losers?. For a total number of 1,596 unmatched pairs, the RDN subject was the winner in 1,050 pairs, the RDN subject was the loser in 378 pairs, and 168 pairs were tied. The win ratio in favour of RDN was 2.78 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.58 to 5.48; p<0.001) and corresponding net benefit statistic was 0.42 (95% CI: 0.20 to 0.63). Sensitivity analyses performed with differing blood pressure thresholds and according to drug adherence testing demonstrated consistent results.
引用
收藏
页码:E1496 / +
页数:8
相关论文
共 26 条
  • [21] Patient Preferences for Pharmaceutical and Device-Based Treatments for Uncontrolled Hypertension: Discrete Choice Experiment
    Kandzari, David E. E.
    Weber, Michael A. A.
    Poulos, Christine
    Coulter, Joshua
    Cohen, Sidney A. A.
    DeBruin, Vanessa
    Jones, Denise
    Pathak, Atul
    CIRCULATION-CARDIOVASCULAR QUALITY AND OUTCOMES, 2023, 16 (01): : E008997
  • [22] Device-based therapies for resistant hypertension in chronic kidney disease: The continuing quest for a cure
    Thomas, George
    CLEVELAND CLINIC JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2020, 87 (07) : 444 - 447
  • [23] Overview of the 2018 US Food and Drug Administration Circulatory System Devices Panel Meeting on Device-Based Therapies for hypertension
    Khalid, Nauman
    Rogers, Toby
    Shlofmitz, Evan
    Chen, Yuefeng
    Dan, Kazuhiro
    Torguson, Rebecca
    Weintraub, William S.
    Waksman, Ron
    CARDIOVASCULAR REVASCULARIZATION MEDICINE, 2019, 20 (10) : 891 - 896
  • [24] Therapeutic perspectives in hypertension: novel means for renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system modulation and emerging device-based approaches
    Unger, Thomas
    Paulis, Ludovit
    Sica, Domenic A.
    EUROPEAN HEART JOURNAL, 2011, 32 (22) : 2739 - +
  • [25] Advances in device-based treatment of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: evidence from clinical trials
    Wu, Ying
    Song, Meiyan
    Wu, Meifang
    Lin, Liming
    ESC HEART FAILURE, 2024, 11 (01): : 13 - 27
  • [26] Impact Of Treatment Stage And Blood Pressure Severity On Preference For Drug And/or Device-based Treatments In Patients With Uncontrolled Hypertension
    Kandzari, David E.
    Poulos, Christine
    Cohen, Sidney A.
    DeBruin, Vanessa
    Hettrick, Doug
    Pathak, Atul
    HYPERTENSION, 2023, 80