Long Run Non-Transitivity of Win Ratio and How to Rule It Out.

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q3 MATHEMATICAL & COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY
Olga V Demler, Anna Győrffy-Kerekes
{"title":"Long Run Non-Transitivity of Win Ratio and How to Rule It Out.","authors":"Olga V Demler, Anna Győrffy-Kerekes","doi":"10.1002/sim.70581","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The win ratio (WR) has emerged as an increasingly used method for analyzing composite endpoints in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Its growing popularity stems from its ability to accommodate a hierarchy of event types within a composite primary endpoint in an RCT. However, as a relatively new measure, the WR exhibits some surprising properties. Oakes and other authors have noted that for a given triplet of participants, there are realizations of event times and hierarchy of event types when \"wins\" form a loop. They term this property \"intransitivity.\" In this paper, we report and study a different phenomenon, a violation of long-run transitivity of WRs, for example, when in the long run <math><mrow><mtext>WR</mtext> <mfenced> <mrow><msub><mi>T</mi> <mi>A</mi></msub> <mo>></mo> <msub><mi>T</mi> <mi>B</mi></msub> </mrow> </mfenced> <mo>></mo> <mn>1</mn></mrow> </math> , <math><mrow><mtext>WR</mtext> <mfenced> <mrow><msub><mi>T</mi> <mi>B</mi></msub> <mo>></mo> <msub><mi>T</mi> <mi>C</mi></msub> </mrow> </mfenced> <mo>></mo> <mn>1</mn></mrow> </math> and paradoxically <math><mrow><mtext>WR</mtext> <mfenced> <mrow><msub><mi>T</mi> <mi>C</mi></msub> <mo>></mo> <msub><mi>T</mi> <mi>A</mi></msub> </mrow> </mfenced> <mo>></mo> <mn>1</mn></mrow> </math> , where <math> <mrow><msub><mi>T</mi> <mi>A</mi></msub> <mo>,</mo> <msub><mi>T</mi> <mi>B</mi></msub> <mo>,</mo> <msub><mi>T</mi> <mi>C</mi></msub> </mrow> </math> denote the time-to-event in trial arms A, B, and C (or placebo, standard of care and novel treatment, respectively). We refer to it as Efron-type \"non-transitivity.\" Unlike Oakes-type intransitivity, Efron-type non-transitivity is an inherent property of the underlying random variables. As such, it cannot be resolved by a longer observation period or larger sample size. Lumley and Gillen showed that transitivity can be guaranteed only for univariate statistics (e.g., mean, median, etc.), whereas head-to-head comparisons can be non-transitive. WR and win proportion (WP) are head-to-head comparisons and may be non-transitive, in which case the best treatment cannot be determined. Therefore, the non-transitivity property challenges the utility of all head-to-head comparisons as efficacy measures in RCTs. In this paper, we explore the scope of this problem, focusing on identifying conditions that rule out non-transitivity for WR, WP, and hazard ratio (HR). We apply our findings to establish transitivity in two case studies using published RCTs. This work highlights an important phenomenon that must be recognized when the WR is used as an efficacy measure in randomized controlled trials.</p>","PeriodicalId":21879,"journal":{"name":"Statistics in Medicine","volume":"45 18-19","pages":"e70581"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13487793/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Statistics in Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.70581","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MATHEMATICAL & COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The win ratio (WR) has emerged as an increasingly used method for analyzing composite endpoints in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Its growing popularity stems from its ability to accommodate a hierarchy of event types within a composite primary endpoint in an RCT. However, as a relatively new measure, the WR exhibits some surprising properties. Oakes and other authors have noted that for a given triplet of participants, there are realizations of event times and hierarchy of event types when "wins" form a loop. They term this property "intransitivity." In this paper, we report and study a different phenomenon, a violation of long-run transitivity of WRs, for example, when in the long run WR T A > T B > 1 , WR T B > T C > 1 and paradoxically WR T C > T A > 1 , where T A , T B , T C denote the time-to-event in trial arms A, B, and C (or placebo, standard of care and novel treatment, respectively). We refer to it as Efron-type "non-transitivity." Unlike Oakes-type intransitivity, Efron-type non-transitivity is an inherent property of the underlying random variables. As such, it cannot be resolved by a longer observation period or larger sample size. Lumley and Gillen showed that transitivity can be guaranteed only for univariate statistics (e.g., mean, median, etc.), whereas head-to-head comparisons can be non-transitive. WR and win proportion (WP) are head-to-head comparisons and may be non-transitive, in which case the best treatment cannot be determined. Therefore, the non-transitivity property challenges the utility of all head-to-head comparisons as efficacy measures in RCTs. In this paper, we explore the scope of this problem, focusing on identifying conditions that rule out non-transitivity for WR, WP, and hazard ratio (HR). We apply our findings to establish transitivity in two case studies using published RCTs. This work highlights an important phenomenon that must be recognized when the WR is used as an efficacy measure in randomized controlled trials.

胜率的长期非传递性及其排除方法。
在随机对照试验(RCTs)中,win ratio (WR)已成为越来越多地用于分析复合终点的方法。它的日益流行源于它能够在RCT的复合主要终点内容纳事件类型的层次结构。然而,作为一种相对较新的测量方法,WR显示出一些令人惊讶的特性。Oakes和其他作者注意到,对于给定的三组参与者,当“获胜”形成循环时,就会实现事件时间和事件类型的层次结构。他们称这种性质为“不及物性”。在本文中,我们报告和研究不同的现象,违反了长期采用的传递性,例如,当从长远来看WR T > T B > 1,或者说是T B > T C > 1和矛盾WR T C > T > 1,其中T, T B, C T表示试验武器的比较,B和C(或安慰剂,保健和小说的标准治疗,分别)。我们把它称为efron型“非及物性”。与oakes型不可及性不同,efron型不可及性是底层随机变量的固有属性。因此,不能通过更长的观察期或更大的样本量来解决。Lumley和Gillen表明,传递性只能保证单变量统计(例如,平均值,中位数等),而头对头比较可以是非传递性的。WR和胜率(WP)是头对头的比较,可能是不可传递的,在这种情况下无法确定最佳治疗。因此,非传递性对随机对照试验中所有头对头比较作为疗效测量的效用提出了挑战。在本文中,我们探讨了这个问题的范围,重点是确定排除WR、WP和风险比(HR)的非传递性的条件。我们利用已发表的随机对照试验在两个案例研究中应用我们的发现来建立及物性。这项工作强调了在随机对照试验中将WR用作疗效指标时必须认识到的一个重要现象。
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
Statistics in Medicine
Statistics in Medicine 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
10.00%
发文量
334
审稿时长
2-4 weeks
期刊介绍: The journal aims to influence practice in medicine and its associated sciences through the publication of papers on statistical and other quantitative methods. Papers will explain new methods and demonstrate their application, preferably through a substantive, real, motivating example or a comprehensive evaluation based on an illustrative example. Alternatively, papers will report on case-studies where creative use or technical generalizations of established methodology is directed towards a substantive application. Reviews of, and tutorials on, general topics relevant to the application of statistics to medicine will also be published. The main criteria for publication are appropriateness of the statistical methods to a particular medical problem and clarity of exposition. Papers with primarily mathematical content will be excluded. The journal aims to enhance communication between statisticians, clinicians and medical researchers.
×
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