Suppr超能文献

复合终点和竞争风险分析。

Composite end points and competing risks analysis.

作者信息

Dayan Victor, Grant Stuart W, Brophy James M, Barili Fabio, Freemantle Nick

机构信息

Centro Cardiovascular Universitario, Cardiac Surgery Department, Hospital de Clinicas, Universidad de la Republica, Montevideo, Uruguay.

Division of Cardiovascular Sciences, University of Manchester, ERC, Manchester University Hospitals Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK.

出版信息

Interdiscip Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2024 Jul 3;39(1). doi: 10.1093/icvts/ivae126.

Abstract

Composite end points are common primary outcomes in clinical trials. Their main benefit of utilizing a composite outcome is increasing the number of primary outcome events, meaning fewer participants are required to deliver an adequately powered trial. By combining multiple important end points in the primary outcome rather than having to select only 1, composite end points potentially make clinically meaningful benefits easier to detect and avoid ranking outcomes hierarchically. However, there are a number of important considerations when designing and interpreting clinical trials that utilize composite end points. In this Statistical Primer, issues with composite end points such as competing events, halo effect, risk of bias, time-to-event limitations and the win ratio are discussed in the context of real world clinical trials.

摘要

复合终点是临床试验中常见的主要结局。使用复合结局的主要益处在于增加主要结局事件的数量,这意味着开展一项具有足够检验效能的试验所需的参与者数量更少。通过在主要结局中合并多个重要终点,而非仅选择一个,复合终点可能使具有临床意义的益处更易于发现,并避免对结局进行分层排序。然而,在设计和解读使用复合终点的临床试验时,有许多重要的考虑因素。在本统计入门中,将结合实际的临床试验来讨论复合终点的相关问题,如竞争事件、光环效应、偏倚风险、事件发生时间限制和获胜率。

相似文献

1
Composite end points and competing risks analysis.
Interdiscip Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2024 Jul 3;39(1). doi: 10.1093/icvts/ivae126.
2
Criteria for use of composite end points for competing risks-a systematic survey of the literature with recommendations.
J Clin Epidemiol. 2017 Feb;82:4-11. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.12.001. Epub 2016 Dec 11.
5
Use of Win Statistics to Analyze Outcomes in the DAPA-HF and DELIVER Trials.
NEJM Evid. 2023 Nov;2(11):EVIDoa2300042. doi: 10.1056/EVIDoa2300042. Epub 2023 Oct 24.
6
A win ratio approach to the re-analysis of Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial.
Clin Trials. 2019 Dec;16(6):626-634. doi: 10.1177/1740774519868233. Epub 2019 Aug 7.
7
Methodologies for pragmatic and efficient assessment of benefits and harms: Application to the SOCRATES trial.
Clin Trials. 2020 Dec;17(6):617-626. doi: 10.1177/1740774520941441. Epub 2020 Jul 15.
8
Impact of summer programmes on the outcomes of disadvantaged or 'at risk' young people: A systematic review.
Campbell Syst Rev. 2024 Jun 13;20(2):e1406. doi: 10.1002/cl2.1406. eCollection 2024 Jun.

引用本文的文献

1
Impact of non-significant right coronary ostial involvement on coronary events in type A aortic dissection surgery.
Interdiscip Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2025 Mar 5;40(3). doi: 10.1093/icvts/ivaf035.
2
Conflicts of interest in clinical practice: lessons learned from cardiovascular medicine.
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2024 Sep 2;66(3). doi: 10.1093/ejcts/ezae296.

本文引用的文献

1
Advanced considerations in survival analysis.
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2024 Feb 1;65(2). doi: 10.1093/ejcts/ezae020.
2
Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Replacement in Low-Risk Patients at Five Years.
N Engl J Med. 2023 Nov 23;389(21):1949-1960. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2307447. Epub 2023 Oct 24.
3
Fallacies of Using the Win Ratio in Cardiovascular Trials: Challenges and Solutions.
JACC Basic Transl Sci. 2023 Jun 26;8(6):720-727. doi: 10.1016/j.jacbts.2023.05.004. eCollection 2023 Jun.
4
Transcatheter Repair for Patients with Tricuspid Regurgitation.
N Engl J Med. 2023 May 18;388(20):1833-1842. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2300525. Epub 2023 Mar 4.
5
Win odds: An adaptation of the win ratio to include ties.
Stat Med. 2021 Jun 30;40(14):3367-3384. doi: 10.1002/sim.8967. Epub 2021 Apr 16.
6
Derivation of Patient-Defined Adverse Cardiovascular and Noncardiovascular Events Through a Modified Delphi Process.
JAMA Netw Open. 2021 Jan 4;4(1):e2032095. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.32095.
7
Use of the Win Ratio in Cardiovascular Trials.
JACC Heart Fail. 2020 Jun;8(6):441-450. doi: 10.1016/j.jchf.2020.02.010.
8
Five-Year Outcomes after PCI or CABG for Left Main Coronary Disease.
N Engl J Med. 2019 Nov 7;381(19):1820-1830. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1909406. Epub 2019 Sep 28.
9
Appropriate endpoints for evaluation of new antibiotic therapies for severe infections: a perspective from COMBACTE's STAT-Net.
Intensive Care Med. 2017 Jul;43(7):1002-1012. doi: 10.1007/s00134-017-4802-4. Epub 2017 May 2.
10
An introduction to multiplicity issues in clinical trials: the what, why, when and how.
Int J Epidemiol. 2017 Apr 1;46(2):746-755. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyw320.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验