Win Ratio Research Articles

Applying the win ratio method in clinical trials of orphan drugs: an analysis of data from the COMET trial of avalglucosidase alfa in patients with late-onset Pompe disease

BackgroundClinical trials for rare diseases often include multiple endpoints that capture the effects of treatment on different disease domains. In many rare diseases, the primary endpoint is not standardized across trials. The win ratio approach was designed to analyze multiple endpoints of interest in clinical trials and has mostly been applied in cardiovascular trials. Here, we applied the win ratio approach to data from COMET, a phase 3 trial in late-onset Pompe disease, to illustrate how this approach can be used to analyze multiple endpoints in the orphan drug context.MethodsAll possible participant pairings from both arms of COMET were compared sequentially on changes at week 49 in upright forced vital capacity (FVC) % predicted and six-minute walk test (6MWT). Each participant’s response for the two endpoints was first classified as a meaningful improvement, no meaningful change, or a meaningful decline using thresholds based on published minimal clinically important differences (FVC ± 4% predicted, 6MWT ± 39 m). Each comparison assessed whether the outcome with avalglucosidase alfa (AVA) was better than (win), worse than (loss), or equivalent to (tie) the outcome with alglucosidase alfa (ALG). If tied on FVC, 6MWT was compared. In this approach, the treatment effect is the ratio of wins to losses (“win ratio”), with ties excluded.ResultsIn the 2499 possible pairings (51 receiving AVA × 49 receiving ALG), the win ratio was 2.37 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.30–4.29, p = 0.005) when FVC was compared before 6MWT. When the order was reversed, the win ratio was 2.02 (95% CI, 1.13–3.62, p = 0.018).ConclusionThe win ratio approach can be used in clinical trials of rare diseases to provide meaningful insight on treatment benefits from multiple endpoints and across disease domains.

Efficacy and Safety of Acoramidis in Transthyretin Amyloid Cardiomyopathy

BackgroundTransthyretin amyloid cardiomyopathy is characterized by the deposition of misfolded monomeric transthyretin (TTR) in the heart. Acoramidis is a high-affinity TTR stabilizer that acts to inhibit dissociation of tetrameric TTR and leads to more than 90% stabilization across the dosing interval as measured ex vivo.MethodsIn this phase 3, double-blind trial, we randomly assigned patients with transthyretin amyloid cardiomyopathy in a 2:1 ratio to receive acoramidis hydrochloride at a dose of 800 mg twice daily or matching placebo for 30 months. Efficacy was assessed in the patients who had an estimated glomerular filtration rate of at least 30 ml per minute per 1.73 m2 of body-surface area. The four-step primary hierarchical analysis included death from any cause, cardiovascular-related hospitalization, the change from baseline in the N-terminal pro–B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) level, and the change from baseline in the 6-minute walk distance. We used the Finkelstein–Schoenfeld method to compare all potential pairs of patients within strata to generate a P value. Key secondary outcomes were death from any cause, the 6-minute walk distance, the score on the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire–Overall Summary, and the serum TTR level.ResultsA total of 632 patients underwent randomization. The primary analysis favored acoramidis over placebo (P<0.001); the corresponding win ratio was 1.8 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.4 to 2.2), with 63.7% of pairwise comparisons favoring acoramidis and 35.9% favoring placebo. Together, death from any cause and cardiovascular-related hospitalization contributed more than half the wins and losses to the win ratio (58% of all pairwise comparisons); NT-proBNP pairwise comparisons yielded the highest ratio of wins to losses (23.3% vs. 7.0%). The overall incidence of adverse events was similar in the acoramidis group and the placebo group (98.1% and 97.6%, respectively); serious adverse events were reported in 54.6% and 64.9% of the patients.ConclusionsIn patients with transthyretin amyloid cardiomyopathy, the receipt of acoramidis resulted in a significantly better four-step primary hierarchical outcome containing components of mortality, morbidity, and function than placebo. Adverse events were similar in the two groups. (Funded by BridgeBio Pharma; ATTRibute-CM ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03860935.)

Clinician's Approach to Advanced Statistical Methods: Win Ratios, Restricted Mean Survival Time, Responder Analyses, and Standardized Mean Differences.

Novel statistical methods have emerged in recent medical literature, which clinicians must understand to properly appraise and integrate evidence into their practice. Some of these key concepts include win ratios, restricted mean survival time, responder analyses, and standardized mean difference. This article offers guidance to busy clinicians on the comprehension and practical applicability of the results to patients. Win ratios provide an alternative method to analyze composite outcomes by prioritizing individual components of the composite; prioritization of the outcomes should be evidence-based, pre-specified, and patient-centered. Restricted mean survival time presents a method to analyze Kaplan-Meier curves when assumptions required for Cox proportional hazards analysis are not met. As it only considers outcomes that occur within a specific timeframe, the duration of follow-up must be appropriately defined and based on prior epidemiologic and mechanistic evidence. Researchers can analyze continuous outcomes with responder analyses, in which participants are dichotomized into "responders" or "non-responders." While clinicians and patients may more easily grasp outcomes analyzed in this way, they should be aware of the loss of information and resulting imprecision, as well as potential to manipulate data presentation. When meta-analyzing continuous outcomes, point estimates can be converted to standardized mean differences to facilitate the combination of data utilizing various outcome measures. However, clinicians may find it challenging to grasp the clinical meaningfulness of a standardized mean difference, and may benefit from converting it to well-known outcomes. By providing the background knowledge of these statistical methods, along with practical applicability, benefits, and inevitable limitations, this article aims to provide clinicians with an approach to appraise the literature and apply the results in clinical practice.

Use of Sodium-Glucose Co-transporter-2 Inhibitors after Acute Myocardial Infarction

Use of Sodium-Glucose Co-transporter-2 Inhibitors after Acute Myocardial Infarction

In-Hospital influenza vaccination to prevent cardiorespiratory events in the first 45 days after acute coronary syndrome: A prespecified analysis of the VIP-ACS trial

BackgroundInfluenza vaccination prevents major cardiovascular events in individuals presenting a recent acute coronary syndrome (ACS), however the early effect of an in-hospital double-dose vaccination strategy remains uncertain. MethodsThe VIP-ACS was a randomized, pragmatic, multicenter, open-label trial with a blinded-adjudication endpoint. Patients with ACS ≤ 7 days of hospitalization were randomized to an in-hospital double-dose quadrivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (double-dose) or a standard-dose influenza vaccine at 30 days post-randomization. The primary endpoint was a hierarchical composite of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, hospitalization for unstable angina, hospitalization for heart failure, urgent coronary revascularization, and hospitalization for respiratory infections, analyzed with the win ratio (WR) method in short-term follow-up (45-days after randomization). ResultsThe trial enrolled 1,801 patients (≥18 years old). Median participant age was 57 years, 70 % were male. There were no significant differences between groups on the primary hierarchical endpoint: there were 5.7 % wins in the double-dose in-hospital group and 5.5 % wins in the standard-dose delayed vaccination group (WR: 1.03; 95 % CI: 0.70–––1.53; P = 0.85). In a sensitivity analysis including COVID-19 infection in the hospitalizations for respiratory infections endpoint, overall results were maintained (WR: 1.03; 95 % CI 0.71–––1.51; P = 0.87). Results were consistent for major cardiovascular events only (WR: 0.82; 95 % CI: 0.48–––1.39; P = 0.46). No serious adverse events were observed. ConclusionIn patients with recent ACS, in-hospital double-dose influenza vaccination did not significantly reduce cardiorespiratory events at 45 days compared with standard-dose vaccination at 30 days post-randomization.

Assessment of the DNA Mismatch Repair System Is Crucial in Colorectal Cancers Necessitating Adjuvant Treatment: A Propensity Score-Matched and Win Ratio Analysis.

A deficient DNA mismatch repair (MMR) system is identified in a non-negligible part of sporadic colorectal cancers (CRCs), and its prognostic value remains controversial. High tumor mutational burden, along with a poor response to conventional chemotherapy and excellent results from immunotherapy, are the main features of this subset. The aim of this study was to evaluate the predictive value of DNA MMR system status for its best treatment. Four hundred and three CRC patients, operated on from 2014 to 2021 and not treated with immunotherapy, entered this study. Immunohistochemistry and polymerase chain reaction, as appropriate, were used to unequivocally group specimens into microsatellite stable (MSS) and instable (MSI) tumors. The win-ratio approach was utilized to compare composite outcomes. MSI tumors accounted for 12.9% of all series. The right tumor location represented the most important factor related to MSI. The status of the DNA MMR system did not appear to correlate with outcome in early-stage CRCs not requiring adjuvant treatment; in advanced stages undergoing conventional chemotherapy, MSI tumors showed significantly poorer overall and disease-free survival rates and the highest win ratio instead. The determination of DNA MMR status is crucial to recommending correct management. There is clear evidence that instable CRCs needing adjuvant therapy should undergo appropriate treatments.

Risk-stratified thromboprophylaxis effects of aspirin versus low-molecular-weight heparin in orthopedic trauma patients: A secondary analysis of the PREVENT CLOT trial.

The PREVENT CLOT trial concluded that thromboprophylaxis with aspirin was noninferior to low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) in preventing death after orthopedic trauma. However, it was unclear if these results applied to patients at highest risk of thrombosis. Therefore, we assessed if the effect of aspirin versus LMWH differed based on patients' baseline risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). The PREVENT CLOT trial enrolled 12,211 adult patients with fractures. This secondary analysis stratified the study population into VTE risk quartiles: low (<1%) to high (>10%) using the Caprini score. We assessed stratum-specific treatment effects using the win ratio method, in which each patient assigned to aspirin was paired with each assigned to LMWH. In each pair, we compared outcomes hierarchically, starting with death, then pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis, and bleeding. The secondary outcome added patients' medication satisfaction as a fifth composite component. In the high-risk quartile (n = 3052), 80% had femur fracture, pelvic, or acetabular fractures. Thoracic (47%) and head (37%) injuries were also common. In the low risk quartile (n = 3053), most patients had a tibia fracture (67%), 5% had a thoracic injury, and less than 1% had head or spinal injuries. Among high risk patients, thromboembolic events did not differ statistically between aspirin and LMWH (win ratio, 0.94; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.82-1.08, p = 0.42). This result was consistent in the low (win ratio, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.90-1.47, p = 0.27), low-medium (win ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.85-1.29, p = 0.68), and medium-high risk quartiles (win ratio, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.80-1.11, p = 0.48). When medication satisfaction was considered, favorable outcomes were 68% more likely with aspirin (win ratio, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.60-1.77; p < 0.001). Thromboembolic outcomes were similar with aspirin or LMWH, even among patients at highest risk of VTE. Aspirin was favored if medication satisfaction was also considered. Therapeutic/Care Management; Level II.

Multifaceted Strategy Based on Automated Text Messaging After a Recent Heart Failure Admission

Readmissions after an index heart failure (HF) hospitalization are a major contemporary health care problem. To evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of an intensive telemonitoring strategy in the vulnerable period after an HF hospitalization. This randomized clinical trial was conducted in 30 HF clinics in Brazil. Patients with left ventricular ejection fraction less than 40% and access to mobile phones were enrolled up to 30 days after an HF admission. Data were collected from July 2019 to July 2022. Participants were randomly assigned to a telemonitoring strategy or standard care. The telemonitoring group received 4 daily short message service text messages to optimize self-care, active engagement, and early intervention. Red flags based on feedback messages triggered automatic diuretic adjustment and/or a telephone call from the health care team. The primary end point was change in N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) from baseline to 180 days. A hierarchical win-ratio analysis incorporating blindly adjudicated clinical events (cardiovascular deaths and HF hospitalization) and variation in NT-proBNP was also performed. Of 699 included patients, 460 (65.8%) were male, and the mean (SD) age was 61.2 (14.5) years. A total of 352 patients were randomly assigned to the telemonitoring strategy and 347 to standard care. Satisfaction with the telemonitoring strategy was excellent (net promoting score at 180 days, 78.5). HF self-care increased significantly in the telemonitoring group compared with the standard care group (score difference at 30 days, -2.21; 95% CI, -3.67 to -0.74; P = .001; score difference at 180 days, -2.08; 95% CI, -3.59 to -0.57; P = .004). Variation of NT-proBNP was similar in the telemonitoring group compared with the standard care group (telemonitoring: baseline, 2593 pg/mL; 95% CI, 2314-2923; 180 days, 1313 pg/mL; 95% CI, 1117-1543; standard care: baseline, 2396 pg/mL; 95% CI, 2122-2721; 180 days, 1319 pg/mL; 95% CI, 1114-1564; ratio of change, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.77-1.11; P = .39). Hierarchical analysis of the composite outcome demonstrated a similar number of wins in both groups (telemonitoring, 49 883 of 122 144 comparisons [40.8%]; standard care, 48 034 of 122 144 comparisons [39.3%]; win ratio, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.86-1.26). An intensive telemonitoring strategy applied in the vulnerable period after an HF admission was feasible, well-accepted, and increased scores of HF self-care but did not translate to reductions in NT-proBNP levels nor improvement in a composite hierarchical clinical outcome. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04062461.

Effect of Noninvasive Airway Management of Comatose Patients With Acute Poisoning

Tracheal intubation is recommended for coma patients and those with severe brain injury, but its use in patients with decreased levels of consciousness from acute poisoning is uncertain. To determine the effect of intubation withholding vs routine practice on clinical outcomes of comatose patients with acute poisoning and a Glasgow Coma Scale score less than 9. This was a multicenter, randomized trial conducted in 20 emergency departments and 1 intensive care unit (ICU) that included comatose patients with suspected acute poisoning and a Glasgow Coma Scale score less than 9 in France between May 16, 2021, and April 12, 2023, and followed up until May 12, 2023. Patients were randomized to undergo conservative airway strategy of intubation withholding vs routine practice. The primary outcome was a hierarchical composite end point of in-hospital death, length of ICU stay, and length of hospital stay. Key secondary outcomes included adverse events resulting from intubation as well as pneumonia within 48 hours. Among the 225 included patients (mean age, 33 years; 38% female), 116 were in the intervention group and 109 in the control group, with respective proportions of intubations of 16% and 58%. No patients died during the in-hospital stay. There was a significant clinical benefit for the primary end point in the intervention group, with a win ratio of 1.85 (95% CI, 1.33 to 2.58). In the intervention group, there was a lower proportion with any adverse event (6% vs 14.7%; absolute risk difference, 8.6% [95% CI, -16.6% to -0.7%]) compared with the control group, and pneumonia occurred in 8 (6.9%) and 16 (14.7%) patients, respectively (absolute risk difference, -7.8% [95% CI, -15.9% to 0.3%]). Among comatose patients with suspected acute poisoning, a conservative strategy of withholding intubation was associated with a greater clinical benefit for the composite end point of in-hospital death, length of ICU stay, and length of hospital stay. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04653597.

Adjusted win ratio using the inverse probability of treatment weighting

ABSTRACT The win ratio method has been increasingly applied in the design and analysis of clinical trials. However, the win ratio method is a univariate approach that does not allow for adjusting for baseline imbalances in covariates, although a stratified win ratio can be calculated when the number of strata is small. This paper proposes an adjusted win ratio to control for such imbalances by inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) method. We derive the adjusted win ratio with its variance and suggest three IPTW adjustments: IPTW-average treatment effect (IPTW-ATE), stabilized IPTW-ATE (SIPTW-ATE) and IPTW-average treatment effect in the treated (IPTW-ATT). The proposed adjusted methods are applied to analyse a composite outcome in the CHARM trial. The statistical properties of the methods are assessed through simulations. Results show that adjusted win ratio methods can correct the win ratio for covariate imbalances at baseline. Simulation results show that the three proposed adjusted win ratios have similar power to detect the treatment difference and have slightly lower power than the corresponding adjusted Cox models when the assumption of proportional hazards holds true but have consistently higher power than adjusted Cox models when the proportional hazard assumption is violated.

Dapagliflozin in Myocardial Infarction without Diabetes or Heart Failure

BackgroundIn patients with acute myocardial infarction (MI), therapies that could further reduce the risk of adverse cardiovascular and metabolic outcomes are needed.MethodsIn this international registry-based, randomized, double-blind trial, patients without prior diabetes or chronic heart failure, presenting with acute MI and impaired left ventricular systolic function, were randomly assigned 10 mg of dapagliflozin or placebo, given once daily. The primary outcome was the hierarchical composite of death, hospitalization for heart failure, nonfatal MI, atrial fibrillation/flutter, type 2 diabetes mellitus, New York Heart Association Functional Classification at the last visit, and body weight decrease of 5% or greater at the last visit using the win ratio analysis method. The key secondary outcome was the same hierarchical composite excluding the body weight component.ResultsWe enrolled 4017 patients of whom 2019 were assigned to dapagliflozin and 1998 to placebo. The analysis of the primary hierarchical composite outcome resulted in significantly more wins for dapagliflozin than for placebo (win ratio, 1.34; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.20 to 1.50; P<0.001). The win ratio outcome, which was adopted in a change of analysis during trial performance because of low event accrual, was mainly driven by the added cardiometabolic outcomes. The composite of time to cardiovascular death/hospitalization for heart failure occurred in 50/2019 (2.5%) patients assigned to dapagliflozin and 52/1998 (2.6%) patients assigned to placebo (hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.64 to 1.40). The rates of other cardiovascular events were low, with differences between the groups not reaching nominal statistical significance. No safety concerns were identified.ConclusionsIn patients with acute MI as noted above, after approximately 1 year of treatment with dapagliflozin there were significant benefits with regard to improvement in cardiometabolic outcomes but no impact on the composite of cardiovascular death or hospitalization for heart failure compared with placebo. (Funded by AstraZeneca; ClinicalTrial.gov number, NCT04564742.)

Net Clinical and Quality of Life Benefit of Luspatercept in Transfusion-Dependent MDS: A Win Ratio Analysis Using Data from the Phase 3 MEDALIST Study

Background: Patients with transfusion-dependent (TD) myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) often experience various anemia-related symptoms and functional impairments. Treatments reducing red blood cell (RBC) transfusion burden could impact these symptoms and/or functions to varying degrees depending on patients' conditions at baseline and warrants the use of composite endpoints, including both clinical outcomes and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) to fully capture these benefits. However, conventional statistical approaches may not satisfactorily assess composite outcomes, especially when the components of the composite outcomes have different types of scales and/or degrees of importance to stakeholders. The win ratio (WR) approach, one of the generalized pairwise comparison methods commonly used for assessing treatments in cardiovascular diseases, offers hierarchical structure, statistical power, and flexibility to address these challenges. Objective: This exploratory analysis used the WR approach to assess the net benefit of luspatercept vs. placebo on composite clinical/PRO endpoints using data from the MEDALIST study. Methods: Four different WR scenarios were performed, in each of which every possible patient-to-patient pair between the luspatercept and placebo arms was compared on a set of relevant clinical/PRO endpoints in a pre-specified order of assumed priority from patients' perspectives, accompanied with a pre-determined rule to assign a win, loss, or tie for luspatercept in each pairwise comparison on each endpoint. If a win or loss could not be determined on a given endpoint, then the next endpoint in the hierarchy was evaluated until a win or loss occurred. Otherwise, if all pre-specified endpoints were evaluated, a tie was assigned. The scenarios considered two clinical endpoints: RBC-transfusion independence [TI] ≥8 weeks over Weeks 1-24 and RBC-TI over Weeks 1-24. PRO endpoints included changes from baseline to the end of Week 24 in five key domains of the European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30), categorized as improvement (≥10-point improvement), stable (10 &amp;gt; change &amp;gt;-10), or worsening (≥10-point worsening). Improvement was considered a better outcome than stable and worsening, and stable was considered better than worsening when determining a win or loss for luspatercept on each of the PRO endpoints. The four different scenarios of composite clinical/PRO endpoints and their order of priority, shown in the Table were pre-specified for assessment . The WR (nominal 95% CI, p-value) for luspatercept on each scenario of the composite clinical/PRO endpoints was calculated as the total number of pairs with a win divided by the total number of pairs with a loss. A WR &amp;gt;1 indicates that luspatercept is more favorable than placebo. Results: 153 patients randomized to the luspatercept arm were compared to 76 patients randomized to the placebo arm, for a total of 11,628 pairwise comparisons within each WR analysis. In all four scenarios, WRs were nominally statistically significantly in favor of luspatercept ( Table). Most wins favoring luspatercept were attributed to wins on the clinical endpoint. Among those pairs who tied on the clinical endpoint, the luspatercept arm experienced more wins (or tied) in almost all of the five PRO endpoints. WRs were similar whether PRO endpoints were prioritized over others or not. Conclusions: The analysis findings indicate that, for two randomly selected patients with low-risk TD MDS, the odds that the patient treated with luspatercept would have a better outcome (if not tied) than the patient with placebo, is significantly higher than 1, ranging between 1.51 to 1.90. The analysis also shows that when multiple clinical and PRO endpoints, especially with different importance to stakeholders, are considered to provide a comprehensive treatment benefit, WR can be a useful and valuable approach for making this evaluation.

Safety and Efficacy of Renal Denervation in Patients Taking Antihypertensive Medications

BackgroundRenal denervation (RDN) reduces blood pressure (BP) in patients with uncontrolled hypertension in the absence of antihypertensive medications. ObjectivesThis trial assessed the safety and efficacy of RDN in the presence of antihypertensive medications. MethodsSPYRAL HTN-ON MED is a prospective, randomized, sham-controlled, patient- and assessor-blinded trial enrolling patients from 56 clinical centers worldwide. Patients were prescribed 1 to 3 antihypertensive medications. Patients were randomized to radiofrequency RDN or sham control procedure. The primary efficacy endpoint was the baseline-adjusted change in mean 24-hour ambulatory systolic BP at 6 months between groups using a Bayesian trial design and analysis. ResultsThe treatment difference in the mean 24-hour ambulatory systolic BP from baseline to 6 months between the RDN group (n = 206; −6.5 ± 10.7 mm Hg) and sham control group (n = 131; −4.5 ± 10.3 mm Hg) was −1.9 mm Hg (95% CI: −4.4 to 0.5 mm Hg; P = 0.12). There was no significant difference between groups in the primary efficacy analysis with a posterior probability of superiority of 0.51 (Bayesian treatment difference: −0.03 mm Hg [95% CI: −2.82 to 2.77 mm Hg]). However, there were changes and increases in medication intensity among sham control patients. RDN was associated with a reduction in office systolic BP compared with sham control at 6 months (adjusted treatment difference: −4.9 mm Hg; P = 0.0015). Night-time BP reductions and win ratio analysis also favored RDN. There was 1 adverse safety event among 253 assessed patients. ConclusionsThere was no significant difference between groups in the primary analysis. However, multiple secondary endpoint analyses favored RDN over sham control. (SPYRAL HTN-ON MED Study [Global Clinical Study of Renal Denervation With the Symplicity Spyral Multi-electrode Renal Denervation System in Patients With Uncontrolled Hypertension in the Absence of Antihypertensive Medications]; NCT02439775)

Use of Win Statistics to Analyze Outcomes in the DAPA-HF and DELIVER Trials

BackgroundThe primary end point in most heart failure (HF) trials is a composite of time to a first worsening HF event or cardiovascular death. Prevention of recurrent events and improvements in symptoms/quality of life are also important for patients but are usually analyzed separately. Win statistics can integrate all these outcomes into a single composite end point, which is analyzed in hierarchical order, reflecting the clinical importance of each component.MethodsThe Dapagliflozin and Prevention of Adverse Outcomes in Heart Failure (DAPA-HF, n=4744) and Dapagliflozin Evaluation to Improve the Lives of Patients with Preserved Ejection Fraction Heart Failure (DELIVER, n=6263) trials enrolled patients with New York Heart Association class II, III, or IV HF, elevated natriuretic peptides, and either an ejection fraction of 40% or less (DAPA-HF) or greater than 40% and left atrial enlargement/left ventricular hypertrophy (DELIVER). We examined the effects of dapagliflozin compared with placebo on a hierarchical composite outcome, including cardiovascular death, total (first and recurrent) HF hospitalizations, total urgent HF visits, and improvement/deterioration in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire total symptom score (KCCQ-TSS; range from 0 to 100, with a higher score indicating fewer symptoms and physical limitations) at 8 months.ResultsFor this composite outcome, the win ratio was 1.30 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.23 to 1.36) in the pooled cohort, 1.33 (95% CI, 1.23 to 1.43) in the DAPA-HF trial, and 1.27 (95% CI, 1.18 to 1.36) in the DELIVER trial. Win odds and net benefit in overall patients were 1.19 (95% CI, 1.14 to 1.24) and 8.7% (95% CI, 6.6 to 10.9%), respectively. In the overall pooled cohort, the majority of wins and losses were accounted for by KCCQ-TSS; 52.4% were settled by the KCCQ-TSS tier in the pooled cohort.ConclusionsIn both the DAPA-HF and DELIVER trials, dapagliflozin led to a significant improvement in composite outcomes that incorporated patient-reported outcomes along with total HF events, as well as cardiovascular deaths. These analyses provided a comprehensive presentation of win statistics and illustrated the utility and flexibility of win statistics in describing the effects of dapagliflozin in two recent clinical trials in patients with HF. (Funded by British Heart Foundation Centre of Research Excellence and others; clinical trial registration numbers, NCT03036124 and NCT03619213.)

Using the win ratio to compare laparoscopic versus open liver resection for colorectal cancer liver metastases.

We sought to assess the overall benefit of laparoscopic versus open hepatectomy for treatment of colorectal liver metastases (CRLMs) using the win ratio, a novel methodological approach. CRLM patients undergoing curative-intent resection in 2001-2018 were identified from an international multi-institutional database. Patients were paired and matched based on age, number and size of lesions, lymph node status and receipt of preoperative chemotherapy. The win ratio was calculated based on margin status, severity of postoperative complications, 90-day mortality, time to recurrence, and time to death. Among 962 patients, the majority underwent open hepatectomy (n=832, 86.5%), while a minority underwent laparoscopic hepatectomy (n=130, 13.5%). Among matched patient-to-patient pairs, the odds of the patient undergoing laparoscopic resection "winning" were 1.77 [WR: 1.77, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.42-2.34]. The win ratio favored laparoscopic hepatectomy independent of low (WR: 2.94, 95% CI: 1.20-6.39), medium (WR: 1.56, 95% CI: 1.16-2.10) or high (WR: 7.25, 95% CI: 1.13-32.0) tumor burden, as well as unilobar (WR: 1.71, 95% CI: 1.25-2.31) or bilobar (WR: 4.57, 95% CI: 2.36-8.64) disease. The odds of "winning" were particularly pronounced relative to short-term outcomes (i.e., 90-day mortality and severity of postoperative complications) (WR: 4.06, 95% CI: 2.33-7.78). Patients undergoing laparoscopic hepatectomy had 77% increased odds of "winning". Laparoscopic liver resection should be strongly considered as a preferred approach to resection in CRLM patients.

Marine n-3 Fatty Acids and Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease: A Novel Analysis of the VITAL Trial Using Win Ratio and Hierarchical Composite Outcomes.

This study aimed to investigate whether n-3 fatty acid supplementation reduced cardiovascular disease (CVD) events in a novel analysis using hierarchical composite CVD outcomes based on win ratio in the VITamin D and OmegA-3 TriaL (VITAL). This was a secondary analysis of our VITAL randomized trial, which assessed the effects of marine n-3 fatty acids (1 g/day) and vitamin D3 on incident CVD and cancer among healthy older adults (n = 25,871). The primary analysis estimated win ratios of a composite of major CVD outcomes prioritized as fatal coronary heart disease, other fatal CVD including stroke, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), and non-fatal stroke, comparing n-3 fatty acids to placebo. The primary result was a nonsignificant benefit of this supplementation for the prioritized primary CVD outcome (reciprocal win ratio [95% confidence interval]: 0.90 [0.78-1.04]), similar to the 0.92 (0.80-1.06) hazard ratio in our original time-to-first event analysis without outcome prioritization. Its benefits came from reducing MI (0.71 [0.57-0.88]) but not stroke (1.01 [0.80 to 1.28]) components. For the primary CVD outcome, participants with low fish consumption at baseline benefited (0.79 [0.65-0.96]) more than those with high consumption (1.05 [0.85-1.30]). These results are consistent with, but slightly stronger than, those without outcome prioritization.

Randomized controlled trial of mechanical thrombectomy vs catheter-directed thrombolysis for acute hemodynamically stable pulmonary embolism: Rationale and design of the PEERLESS study

BackgroundThe identification of hemodynamically stable pulmonary embolism (PE) patients who may benefit from advanced treatment beyond anticoagulation is unclear. However, when intervention is deemed necessary by the PE patient's care team, data to select the most advantageous interventional treatment option are lacking. Limiting factors include major bleeding risks with systemic and locally delivered thrombolytics and the overall lack of randomized controlled trial (RCT) data for interventional treatment strategies. Considering the expansion of the pulmonary embolism response team (PERT) model, corresponding rise in interventional treatment, and number of thrombolytic and nonthrombolytic catheter-directed devices coming to market, robust evidence is needed to identify the safest and most effective interventional option for patients. MethodsThe PEERLESS study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05111613) is a currently enrolling multinational RCT comparing large-bore mechanical thrombectomy (MT) with the FlowTriever System (Inari Medical, Irvine, CA) vs catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT). A total of 550 hemodynamically stable PE patients with right ventricular (RV) dysfunction and additional clinical risk factors will undergo 1:1 randomization. Up to 150 additional patients with absolute thrombolytic contraindications may be enrolled into a nonrandomized MT cohort for separate analysis. The primary end point will be assessed at hospital discharge or 7 days post procedure, whichever is sooner, and is a composite of the following clinical outcomes constructed as a hierarchal win ratio: (1) all-cause mortality, (2) intracranial hemorrhage, (3) major bleeding, (4) clinical deterioration and/or escalation to bailout, and (5) intensive care unit admission and length of stay. The first 4 components of the win ratio will be adjudicated by a Clinical Events Committee, and all components will be assessed individually as secondary end points. Other key secondary end points include all-cause mortality and readmission within 30 days of procedure and device- and drug-related serious adverse events through the 30-day visit. ImplicationsPEERLESS is the first RCT to compare 2 different interventional treatment strategies for hemodynamically stable PE and results will inform strategy selection after the physician or PERT determines advanced therapy is warranted.

Winratiotest: A command for implementing the win ratio and stratified win ratio in Stata

The win ratio is a statistical method most commonly used for analyzing composite outcomes in clinical trials. Composite outcomes comprise two or more distinct “component” events (for example, myocardial infarction or death) and are typically analyzed using time-to-first-event methods ignoring the relative importance of the component events. When using the win ratio, component events are instead placed into a hierarchy from most to least important; more important components can then be prioritized over less important outcomes (for example, death can be prioritized over myocardial infarction). Furthermore, the win ratio enables outcomes of different types (for example, time-to-event, continuous, binary, ordinal, and repeat events) to be combined. We present winratiotest, a command to implement the win-ratio approach for hierarchical outcomes in a flexible and user-friendly way.

Ferric Carboxymaltose in Heart Failure with Iron Deficiency

BackgroundFerric carboxymaltose therapy reduces symptoms and improves quality of life in patients who have heart failure with a reduced ejection fraction and iron deficiency. Additional evidence about the effects of ferric carboxymaltose on clinical events is needed.MethodsIn this double-blind, randomized trial, we assigned ambulatory patients with heart failure, a left ventricular ejection fraction of 40% or less, and iron deficiency, in a 1:1 ratio, to receive intravenous ferric carboxymaltose or placebo, in addition to standard therapy for heart failure. Ferric carboxymaltose or placebo was given every 6 months as needed on the basis of iron indexes and hemoglobin levels. The primary outcome was a hierarchical composite of death within 12 months after randomization, hospitalizations for heart failure within 12 months after randomization, or change from baseline to 6 months in the 6-minute walk distance. The significance level was set at 0.01.ResultsWe enrolled 3065 patients, of whom 1532 were randomly assigned to the ferric carboxymaltose group and 1533 to the placebo group. Death by month 12 occurred in 131 patients (8.6%) in the ferric carboxymaltose group and 158 (10.3%) in the placebo group; a total of 297 and 332 hospitalizations for heart failure, respectively, occurred by month 12; and the mean (±SD) change from baseline to 6 months in the 6-minute walk distance was 8±60 and 4±59 m, respectively (Wilcoxon–Mann–Whitney P=0.02; unmatched win ratio, 1.10; 99% confidence interval, 0.99 to 1.23). Repeated dosing of ferric carboxymaltose appeared to be safe with an acceptable adverse-event profile in the majority of patients. The number of patients with serious adverse events occurring during the treatment period was similar in the two groups (413 patients [27.0%] in the ferric carboxymaltose group and 401 [26.2%] in the placebo group).ConclusionsAmong ambulatory patients who had heart failure with a reduced ejection fraction and iron deficiency, there was no apparent difference between ferric carboxymaltose and placebo with respect to the hierarchical composite of death, hospitalizations for heart failure, or 6-minute walk distance. (Funded by American Regent, a Daiichi Sankyo Group company; HEART-FID ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03037931.)

Non-vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulant, Warfarin, and ABC Pathway Adherence on Hierarchical Outcomes: Win Ratio Analysis of the COOL-AF Registry.

Atrial fibrillation (AF) Better Care (ABC) pathway adherence is associated with improved outcomes. Clinical trials have shown that non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are as least as effective as warfarin for stroke prevention in AF patients. The Win Ratio method, analyzing hierarchical composite outcomes considering event timing and severity, has limited data on its use in Asians. We aim to apply Win Ratio in a registry to access the comparative effectiveness of NOACs versus warfarin and ABC adherence versus nonadherence in Asian patients with AF. Our study included nonvalvular AF patients from the nationwide prospective COOL-AF registry in Thailand. The NOAC-treated group was compared with the warfarin-treated group using the Win Ratio, with the following order: all-cause death, intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), ischemic stroke/transient ischemic attack/systemic embolism, non-ICH major bleeding, and myocardial infarction or heart failure. ABC pathway adherence versus nonadherence was also compared. A Win Ratio greater than 1.00 indicating a better outcome. The analysis included 2,568 patients, with 228 in the NOAC group and 2,340 in the warfarin group. The NOAC group had more wins than the warfarin group, with an unmatched Win Ratio of 1.64 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.22-2.20; p < 0.001). When compared with nonadherence, ABC pathway adherence was associated with a Win Ratio of 1.57 (95% CI: 1.33-1.85; p < 0.001). This Win Ratio analysis demonstrates the significant benefits of NOACs over warfarin and ABC pathway adherence over nonadherence in reducing the composite outcome in patients with AF.