期刊文献+

Opportunities and challenges of clinical trials in cardiology using composite primary endpoints 被引量:1

Opportunities and challenges of clinical trials in cardiology using composite primary endpoints
下载PDF
导出
摘要 In clinical trials, the primary efficacy endpoint often corresponds to a so-called "composite endpoint". Composite endpoints combine several events of interest within a single outcome variable. Thereby it is intended to enlarge the expected effect size and thereby increase the power of the study. However, composite endpoints also come along with serious challenges and problems. On the one hand, composite endpoints may lead to difficulties during the planning phase of a trial with respect to the sample size calculation, asthe expected clinical effect of an intervention on the composite endpoint depends on the effects on its single components and their correlations. This may lead to wrong assumptions on the sample size needed. Too optimistic assumptions on the expected effect may lead to an underpowered of the trial, whereas a too conservatively estimated effect results in an unnecessarily high sample size. On the other hand, the interpretation of composite endpoints may be difficult, as the observed effect of the composite does not necessarily reflect the effects of the single components. Therefore the demonstration of the clinical efficacy of a new intervention by exclusively evaluating the composite endpoint may be misleading. The present paper summarizes results and recommendations of the latest research addressing the above mentioned problems in the planning, analysis and interpretation of clinical trials with composite endpoints, thereby providing a practical guidance for users. In clinical trials, the primary efficacy endpoint often corresponds to a so-called "composite endpoint". Composite endpoints combine several events of interest within a single outcome variable. Thereby it is intended to enlarge the expected effect size and thereby increase the power of the study. However, composite endpoints also come along with serious challenges and problems. On the one hand, composite endpoints may lead to difficulties during the planning phase of a trial with respect to the sample size calculation, asthe expected clinical effect of an intervention on the composite endpoint depends on the effects on its single components and their correlations. This may lead to wrong assumptions on the sample size needed. Too optimistic assumptions on the expected effect may lead to an underpowered of the trial, whereas a too conservatively estimated effect results in an unnecessarily high sample size. On the other hand, the interpretation of composite endpoints may be difficult, as the observed effect of the composite does not necessarily reflect the effects of the single components. Therefore the demonstration of the clinical efficacy of a new intervention by exclusively evaluating the composite endpoint may be misleading. The present paper summarizes results and recommendations of the latest research addressing the above mentioned problems in the planning, analysis and interpretation of clinical trials with composite endpoints, thereby providing a practical guidance for users.
出处 《World Journal of Cardiology》 CAS 2015年第1期1-5,共5页 世界心脏病学杂志(英文版)(电子版)
关键词 COMPOSITE ENDPOINT Competing risks Multiple testing TIME-TO-EVENT Adaptive designs Composite endpoint Competing risks Multiple testing Time-to-event Adaptive designs
  • 相关文献

参考文献20

  • 1Svenja Schüler,Annegret Mucha,Patrick Doherty,Meinhard Kieser,Geraldine Rauch.Easily applicable multiple testing procedures to improve the interpretation of clinical trials with composite endpoints[J]. International Journal of Cardiology . 2014
  • 2Geraldine Rauch,Antje Jahn‐Eimermacher,Werner Brannath,Meinhard Kieser.Opportunities and challenges of combined effect measures based on prioritized outcomes[J]. Statist. Med. . 2014 (7)
  • 3G. Rauch,M. Wirths,M. Kieser.Consistency-adjusted alpha allocation methods for a time-to-event analysis of composite endpoints[J]. Computational Statistics and Data Analysis . 2014
  • 4G. Rauch,J. Beyersmann.Planning and evaluating clinical trials with composite time‐to‐first‐event endpoints in a competing risk framework[J]. Statist. Med. . 2013 (21)
  • 5G. Rauch,M. Kieser.An expected power approach for the assessment of composite endpoints and their components[J]. Computational Statistics and Data Analysis . 2013
  • 6MarcBuyse.Generalized pairwise comparisons of prioritized outcomes in the two‐sample problem[J]. Statist. Med. . 2010 (30)
  • 7M. Angelyn Bethel,Rury Holman,Steven M. Haffner,Robert M. Califf,Alice Huntsman-Labed,Tsushung A. Hua,John McMurray.Determining the most appropriate components for a composite clinical trial outcome[J]. American Heart Journal . 2008 (4)
  • 8Takashi Daimon.Bayesian sample size calculations for a non-inferiority test of two proportions in clinical trials[J]. Contemporary Clinical Trials . 2007 (4)
  • 9Peter H. Westfall,Alok Krishen.Optimally weighted, fixed sequence and gatekeeper multiple testing procedures[J]. Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference . 2001 (1)
  • 10Christopher P. Cannon.Clinical perspectives on the use of composite endpoints[J]. Controlled Clinical Trials . 1997 (6)

引证文献1

二级引证文献2

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部