Abstract:Background: Composite outcomes, which combine multiple types of clinical events into a single outcome, are common in clinical trials. The usual analysis considers the time to first occurrence of any event in the composite. The major criticisms of such an approach are (1) this implicitly treats the outcomes as if they were of equal importance, but they often vary in terms of clinical relevance and severity, (2) study participants often experience more than one type of event, and (3) often less severe events occur before more severe ones, but the usual analysis disregards any information beyond that first event. Methods: A novel approach, referred to as the win ratio, which addresses the aforementioned criticisms of composite outcomes, is illustrated with a re-analysis of data on fatal and non-fatal cardiovascular disease time-to-event outcomes reported for the Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial. In this trial, 12,866 participants were randomized to a special intervention group ( n = 6428) or a usual care ( n = 6438) group. Non-fatal outcomes were ranked by risk of cardiovascular disease death up to 20 years after trial. In one approach, participants in the special intervention and usual care groups were first matched on coronary heart disease risk at baseline and time of enrollment. Each matched pair was categorized as a winner or loser depending on which one experienced a cardiovascular disease death first. If neither died of cardiovascular disease causes, they were evaluated on the most severe non-fatal outcome. This process continued for all the non-fatal outcomes. A second win ratio statistic, obtained from Cox partial likelihood, was also estimated. This statistic provides a valid estimate of the win ratio using multiple events if the marginal and conditional survivor functions of each outcome satisfy proportional hazards. Loss ratio statistics (inverse of win ratios) are compared to hazard ratios from the usual first event analysis. A larger 11-event composite was also considered. Results: For the 7-event cardiovascular disease composite, the previously reported first event analysis based on 581 events in the special intervention group and 652 events in the usual care group yielded a hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) of 0.89 (0.79–0.99), compared to 0.86 (0.77–0.97) and 0.91 (0.81–1.02) for the severity ranked estimates. Results for the 11-event composite also confirmed the findings of the first event analysis. Conclusion: The win ratio analysis was able to leverage information collected past the first experienced event and rank events by severity. The results were similar to and confirmed previously reported traditional first event analysis. The win ratio statistic is a useful adjunct to the traditional first event analysis for trials with composite outcomes.

Causal Inference on Win Ratio for Observational Data with Dependent Subjects

A win ratio approach to the re-analysis of Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial

Statistical Power Considerations in the Use of Win Ratio in Cardiovascular Outcome Trials

Robust statistical inference for the matched net benefit and the matched win ratio using prioritized composite endpoints

A Nonparametric Global Win Probability Approach to the Analysis and Sizing of Randomized Controlled Trials With Multiple Endpoints of Different Scales and Missing Data: Beyond O'Brien–Wei–Lachin

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

Shrinking Coarsened Win Ratio and Testing of Composite Endpoint

The covariate-adjusted residual estimator and its use in both randomized trials and observational settings

A Comparative Study of Design-Based and Analysis-Based Approaches to Causal Inference with Observational Data

Causal Inference for Comprehensive Cohort Studies

The win ratio in cardiology trials: lessons learnt, new developments, and wise future use

Balancing Weights for Causal Inference in Observational Factorial Studies

An Inverse Probability Weighted Regression Method that Accounts for Right-censoring for Causal Inference with Multiple Treatments and a Binary Outcome

Causal Inference When Counterfactuals Depend on the Proportion of All Subjects Exposed

The inverse-probability-of-censoring weighting (IPCW) adjusted win ratio statistic: an unbiased estimator in the presence of independent censoring

Adaptive Combination of Randomized and Observational Data

Use of the Win Ratio for Analysis of Stroke Trials: Description, Illustration, and Planned Use in the Second European Carotid Surgery Trial (ECST-2)

On approximate equality of Z-values of the statistical tests for win statistics (win ratio, win odds, and net benefit)

Causal effect estimation in survival analysis with high dimensional confounders

Causal inference methods for combining randomized trials and observational studies: a review

A Causally Formulated Hazard Ratio Estimation through Backdoor Adjustment on Structural Causal Model