Abstract:Clinical Trials, Ahead of Print. Background/AimsThis study aimed to determine the prevalence of ordinal, binary, and numerical composite endpoints among coronavirus disease 2019 trials and the potential bias attributable to their use.MethodsWe systematically reviewed the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register to assess the prevalence, characteristics, and bias associated with using composite endpoints in coronavirus disease 2019 randomized clinical trials. We compared the effect measure (relative risk) of composite outcomes and that of its most critical component (i.e. death) by estimating the Bias Attributable to Composite Outcomes index [ln(relative risk for the composite outcome)/ln(relative risk for death)].ResultsComposite endpoints accounted for 152 out of 417 primary endpoints in coronavirus disease 2019 randomized trials, being more frequent among studies published in high-impact journals. Ordinal endpoints were the most common (54% of all composites), followed by binary or time-to-event (34%), numerical (11%), and hierarchical (1%). Composites predominated among trials enrolling patients with severe disease when compared to trials with a mild or moderate case mix (odds ratio = 1.72). Adaptations of the seven-point World Health Organization scale occurred in 40% of the ordinal primary endpoints, which frequently underwent dichotomization for the statistical analyses. Mortality accounted for a median of 24% (interquartile range: 6%–48%) of all events when included in the composite. The median point estimate of the Bias Attributable to Composite Outcomes index was 0.3 (interquartile range: −0.1 to 0.7), being significantly lower than 1 in 5 of 24 comparisons.DiscussionComposite endpoints were used in a significant proportion of coronavirus disease 2019 trials, especially those involving severely ill patients. This is likely due to the higher anticipated rates of competing events, such as death, in such studies. Ordinal composites were common but often not fully appreciated, reducing the potential gains in information and statistical efficiency. For studies with binary composites, death was the most frequent component, and, unexpectedly, composite outcome estimates were often closer to the null when compared to those for mortality death. Numerical composites were less common, and only two trials used hierarchical endpoints. These newer approaches may offer advantages over traditional binary and ordinal composites; however, their potential benefits warrant further scrutiny.ConclusionComposite endpoints accounted for more than a third of coronavirus disease 2019 trials' primary endpoints; their use was more common among studies that included patients with severe disease and their point effect estimates tended to underestimate those for mortality.

Overview of constructing methods for the composite endpoint evaluation index in clinical trials

Some statistical methods for multiple endpoints in clinical trials

Adaptive clinical trial designs with blinded selection of binary composite endpoints and sample size reassessment

Analysis of composite time-to-event endpoints in cardiovascular outcome trials

Design of Trials with Composite Endpoints with the R Package CompAREdesign

Composite endpoints in COVID-19 randomized controlled trials: a systematic review

Multivariate Rank-Based Analysis of Multiple Endpoints in Clinical Trials: A Global Test Approach

A new approach for sizing trials with composite binary endpoints using anticipated marginal values and accounting for the correlation between components

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

Comparative Review of Novel Model‐assisted Designs for Phase I Clinical Trials

Health Utility Adjusted Survival: a Composite Endpoint for Clinical Trial Designs

Bayesian Approach for Design and Analysis of Medical Device Trials in the Era of Modern Clinical Studies

Constructing a finer-grained representation of clinical trial results from ClinicalTrials.gov

A Calibrated Power Prior Approach to Borrow Information from Historical Data with Application to Biosimilar Clinical Trials.

Comparative review of novel model-assisted designs for phase I clinical trials.

Review of Effect Evaluation of Clinical Pathway at Home and Abroad

New strategies for confirmatory testing of secondary hypotheses on combined data from multiple trials

Sample Size Estimation in the Sequential Parallel Comparison Design and the Two-way Enriched Design

Shrinking Coarsened Win Ratio and Testing of Composite Endpoint

Establishing and Using Threshold of Surrogate Endpoint in Relation to Clinical Endpoint

Comparing Analytical Methods for Composite Endpoints in Clinical Trials: Insights from the Vericiguat Global Study in Subjects with Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction (VICTORIA) Trial