心血管试验的分层复合结局和Win Ratio方法:综述和后续指南。

IF 35.5 1区 医学 Q1 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Circulation Pub Date : 2025-06-03 Epub Date: 2025-06-02 DOI:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.124.070251
John Gregson, Dylan Taylor, Ruth Owen, Tim Collier, David J Cohen, Stuart Pocock
{"title":"心血管试验的分层复合结局和Win Ratio方法:综述和后续指南。","authors":"John Gregson, Dylan Taylor, Ruth Owen, Tim Collier, David J Cohen, Stuart Pocock","doi":"10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.124.070251","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The win ratio is a method for analyzing a hierarchical composite outcome. It has been most widely used in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in cardiovascular disease. We performed a review of cardiovascular RCTs using the win ratio published between January 2022 and July 2024. The aims were to summarize current use and to provide examples to illustrate effective use and communication. We identified 36 eligible RCTs, mainly in heart failure and ischemic heart disease. Intervention was pharmaceutical in 26, a procedure in 7, and treatment strategy in 3 trials. When outcomes were analyzed with both conventional composite end points or hierarchical analysis, the conclusions tended to be similar. The win ratio was often used to combine evidence from event outcomes and quantitative measures together in a hierarchical composite, as was done in 23 RCTs. It was also used to create a clinically more relevant measure in RCTs by recognizing the clinical priorities among event outcomes. Selected example RCTs illustrate how the clarity of win ratio findings can be improved by (1) complementing the win ratio (a relative measure) with the win difference, (2) identifying which components of a hierarchical composite drive the overall results, and (3) clearly prespecifying the outcomes and win ratio analysis to be used. We conclude with a set of recommendations for future use of hierarchical composite outcomes and the win ratio. When used wisely, the win ratio is a valuable tool in the analysis of RCTs.</p>","PeriodicalId":10331,"journal":{"name":"Circulation","volume":"151 22","pages":"1606-1619"},"PeriodicalIF":35.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Hierarchical Composite Outcomes and Win Ratio Methods in Cardiovascular Trials: A Review and Consequent Guidance.\",\"authors\":\"John Gregson, Dylan Taylor, Ruth Owen, Tim Collier, David J Cohen, Stuart Pocock\",\"doi\":\"10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.124.070251\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The win ratio is a method for analyzing a hierarchical composite outcome. It has been most widely used in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in cardiovascular disease. We performed a review of cardiovascular RCTs using the win ratio published between January 2022 and July 2024. The aims were to summarize current use and to provide examples to illustrate effective use and communication. We identified 36 eligible RCTs, mainly in heart failure and ischemic heart disease. Intervention was pharmaceutical in 26, a procedure in 7, and treatment strategy in 3 trials. When outcomes were analyzed with both conventional composite end points or hierarchical analysis, the conclusions tended to be similar. The win ratio was often used to combine evidence from event outcomes and quantitative measures together in a hierarchical composite, as was done in 23 RCTs. It was also used to create a clinically more relevant measure in RCTs by recognizing the clinical priorities among event outcomes. Selected example RCTs illustrate how the clarity of win ratio findings can be improved by (1) complementing the win ratio (a relative measure) with the win difference, (2) identifying which components of a hierarchical composite drive the overall results, and (3) clearly prespecifying the outcomes and win ratio analysis to be used. We conclude with a set of recommendations for future use of hierarchical composite outcomes and the win ratio. When used wisely, the win ratio is a valuable tool in the analysis of RCTs.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10331,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Circulation\",\"volume\":\"151 22\",\"pages\":\"1606-1619\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":35.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Circulation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.124.070251\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/6/2 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Circulation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.124.070251","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/6/2 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

胜率是一种分析分层复合结果的方法。它被广泛应用于心血管疾病的随机临床试验(rct)。我们使用2022年1月至2024年7月发表的胜比对心血管随机对照试验进行了回顾。目的是总结当前的使用情况,并举例说明有效的使用和沟通。我们确定了36项符合条件的随机对照试验,主要涉及心力衰竭和缺血性心脏病。26个试验采用药物干预,7个试验采用手术干预,3个试验采用治疗策略。当用传统的复合终点或层次分析法分析结果时,结论趋于相似。胜率通常用于将事件结果和定量测量的证据结合在一起,形成层次复合,如23项随机对照试验所做的那样。它还被用于通过识别事件结果之间的临床优先级,在随机对照试验中创建临床更相关的测量。选定的随机对照试验示例说明了如何通过以下方式提高胜率结果的清晰度:(1)用胜率差异补充胜率(一种相对度量),(2)确定分层组合的哪些组成部分驱动整体结果,以及(3)明确预先指定要使用的结果和胜率分析。最后,我们对分层复合结果和胜率的未来使用提出了一组建议。如果使用得当,胜率是分析随机对照试验的一个有价值的工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Hierarchical Composite Outcomes and Win Ratio Methods in Cardiovascular Trials: A Review and Consequent Guidance.

The win ratio is a method for analyzing a hierarchical composite outcome. It has been most widely used in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in cardiovascular disease. We performed a review of cardiovascular RCTs using the win ratio published between January 2022 and July 2024. The aims were to summarize current use and to provide examples to illustrate effective use and communication. We identified 36 eligible RCTs, mainly in heart failure and ischemic heart disease. Intervention was pharmaceutical in 26, a procedure in 7, and treatment strategy in 3 trials. When outcomes were analyzed with both conventional composite end points or hierarchical analysis, the conclusions tended to be similar. The win ratio was often used to combine evidence from event outcomes and quantitative measures together in a hierarchical composite, as was done in 23 RCTs. It was also used to create a clinically more relevant measure in RCTs by recognizing the clinical priorities among event outcomes. Selected example RCTs illustrate how the clarity of win ratio findings can be improved by (1) complementing the win ratio (a relative measure) with the win difference, (2) identifying which components of a hierarchical composite drive the overall results, and (3) clearly prespecifying the outcomes and win ratio analysis to be used. We conclude with a set of recommendations for future use of hierarchical composite outcomes and the win ratio. When used wisely, the win ratio is a valuable tool in the analysis of RCTs.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Circulation
Circulation 医学-外周血管病
CiteScore
45.70
自引率
2.10%
发文量
1473
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Circulation is a platform that publishes a diverse range of content related to cardiovascular health and disease. This includes original research manuscripts, review articles, and other contributions spanning observational studies, clinical trials, epidemiology, health services, outcomes studies, and advancements in basic and translational research. The journal serves as a vital resource for professionals and researchers in the field of cardiovascular health, providing a comprehensive platform for disseminating knowledge and fostering advancements in the understanding and management of cardiovascular issues.
×
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