Statistical methods for composite analysis of recurrent and terminal events in clinical trials.

IF 1.5 3区 数学 Q3 MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS
Lifetime Data Analysis Pub Date : 2025-10-01 Epub Date: 2025-10-15 DOI:10.1007/s10985-025-09672-z
Yiyuan Huang, Douglas Schaubel, Min Zhang
{"title":"Statistical methods for composite analysis of recurrent and terminal events in clinical trials.","authors":"Yiyuan Huang, Douglas Schaubel, Min Zhang","doi":"10.1007/s10985-025-09672-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In many clinical trials, one is interested in evaluating the treatment effect based on different types of outcomes, including recurrent and terminal events. The most popular approach is the time-to-first-event analysis (TTFE), based on the composite outcome of the time to the first event among all events of interest. The motivation for the composite outcome approach is to increase the number of events and potentially increase power. Other composite outcome or composite analysis methods are also studied in the literature, but are less adopted in practice. In this article, we first review the mainstream composite analysis methods and classify them into three categories: (A) Composite-outcome Methods, which combine multiple events into a composite outcome before analysis, e.g., combining events into a time-to-event outcome in TTFE and into a single recurrent event process in the combined-recurrent-event analysis (CRE); (B) Joint-analysis Methods, which test for the recurrent event process and the terminal event jointly, e.g., Joint Frailty Model (JFM), Ghosh-Lin Method (GL), and Nelsen-Aalen Method (NA); (C) Win-ratio type Methods that account for the ordering of two types of events, e.g., Win-fraction Regression (WR). We conduct comprehensive simulation studies to evaluate the performance of various types of methods in terms of type I error control and power under a wide range of scenarios. We found that the non-parametric joint testing approach (GL/NA) and CRE have overall the best performance. However, TTFE and WR exhibit relatively low power. Also, adding events that have no or weak association with treatment usually decreases power.</p>","PeriodicalId":49908,"journal":{"name":"Lifetime Data Analysis","volume":" ","pages":"810-829"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Lifetime Data Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"100","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10985-025-09672-z","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"数学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/10/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In many clinical trials, one is interested in evaluating the treatment effect based on different types of outcomes, including recurrent and terminal events. The most popular approach is the time-to-first-event analysis (TTFE), based on the composite outcome of the time to the first event among all events of interest. The motivation for the composite outcome approach is to increase the number of events and potentially increase power. Other composite outcome or composite analysis methods are also studied in the literature, but are less adopted in practice. In this article, we first review the mainstream composite analysis methods and classify them into three categories: (A) Composite-outcome Methods, which combine multiple events into a composite outcome before analysis, e.g., combining events into a time-to-event outcome in TTFE and into a single recurrent event process in the combined-recurrent-event analysis (CRE); (B) Joint-analysis Methods, which test for the recurrent event process and the terminal event jointly, e.g., Joint Frailty Model (JFM), Ghosh-Lin Method (GL), and Nelsen-Aalen Method (NA); (C) Win-ratio type Methods that account for the ordering of two types of events, e.g., Win-fraction Regression (WR). We conduct comprehensive simulation studies to evaluate the performance of various types of methods in terms of type I error control and power under a wide range of scenarios. We found that the non-parametric joint testing approach (GL/NA) and CRE have overall the best performance. However, TTFE and WR exhibit relatively low power. Also, adding events that have no or weak association with treatment usually decreases power.

临床试验中复发性和终末期事件综合分析的统计方法。
在许多临床试验中,人们感兴趣的是基于不同类型的结果评估治疗效果,包括复发性和终末期事件。最流行的方法是到第一个事件的时间分析(TTFE),它基于所有感兴趣的事件中到第一个事件的时间的复合结果。复合结果方法的动机是增加事件的数量,并潜在地增加力量。其他的复合结果或复合分析方法在文献中也有研究,但在实践中采用较少。在本文中,我们首先回顾了主流的复合分析方法,并将其分为三类:(A)复合结果方法,即在分析之前将多个事件组合成一个复合结果,例如,在TTFE中将事件组合成一个时间到事件的结果,在组合-循环事件分析(CRE)中将事件组合成一个单一的循环事件过程;(B)联合分析法(Joint-analysis Methods),联合检验反复事件过程和终端事件,如Joint vulnerability Model (JFM)、Ghosh-Lin Method (GL)、nelson - aalen Method (NA);(C) Win-ratio type解释两类事件排序的方法,例如Win-fraction Regression (WR)。我们进行了全面的仿真研究,以评估各种类型的方法在各种场景下的I型误差控制和功率方面的性能。我们发现非参数联合测试方法(GL/NA)和CRE具有最佳的综合性能。然而,tfe和WR表现出相对较低的功率。此外,添加与治疗没有或弱关联的事件通常会降低功率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Lifetime Data Analysis
Lifetime Data Analysis 数学-数学跨学科应用
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
7.70%
发文量
43
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The objective of Lifetime Data Analysis is to advance and promote statistical science in the various applied fields that deal with lifetime data, including: Actuarial Science – Economics – Engineering Sciences – Environmental Sciences – Management Science – Medicine – Operations Research – Public Health – Social and Behavioral Sciences.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书