Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 25, 2026

Optimized Management of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke
Published on: January 18, 2018
Re-Examination of the BEST Trial Using Composite Outcomes, Including Emergency Department Visits
Li Shen1, Pardeep S Jhund1, Ulrik M Mogensen2
1BHF Cardiovascular Research Centre, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom.
Insights
Choosing the right endpoint in heart failure trials significantly impacts study size and duration. Broader composite endpoints, like cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization, reduce trial requirements compared to mortality alone.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Clinical Trials
- Biostatistics
Background:
- Endpoint selection in heart failure trials has evolved over three decades.
- The Beta-blocker Evaluation of Survival Trial (BEST) provides a case study for endpoint analysis.
Purpose of the Study:
- To examine the influence of endpoint choice on trial size, duration, and interpretation of results in heart failure patients.
- To compare different composite endpoints and recurrent event analysis within the BEST trial.
Main Methods:
- Cox regression analysis was used to compare bucindolol's effect on mortality, cardiovascular death/heart failure hospitalization (CVD/HFH), and expanded composites including ED visits.
- The Lin, Wei, Ying, and Yang model was employed for recurrent event analysis.
Main Results:
- The composite endpoint of CVD/HFH showed a significant benefit for bucindolol (HR: 0.80; p < 0.001) compared to placebo.
- Using CVD/HFH as the endpoint instead of all-cause mortality would have reduced trial size by 40% and duration by 69%.
- Recurrent CVD/HFH events also favored bucindolol (rate ratio: 0.83; p = 0.003).
Conclusions:
- Endpoint selection critically influences heart failure trial logistics and outcome interpretation.
- Broader composite endpoints and the analysis of recurrent events warrant further investigation in clinical trials.
Objectives:
The influence of choice of endpoint on trial size, duration, and interpretation of results was examined in patients with heart failure who were enrolled in BEST (Beta-blocker Evaluation of Survival Trial).
Background:
The choice of endpoints in heart failure trials has evolved over the past 3 decades.
Methods:
In the BEST trial, we used Cox regression analysis to examine the effect of bucindolol on the current standard composite of cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization (CVD/HFH) compared with the original primary mortality endpoint and the expanded composite that included emergency department (ED) visits. We also undertook an analysis of recurrent events primarily using the Lin, Wei, Ying, and Yang model.
Results:
Overall, 448 (33%) patients on placebo and 411 (30%) patients on bucindolol died (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.90; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.78 to 1.02; p = 0.11). A total of 730 (54%) patients experienced CVD/HFH on placebo and 624 (46%) on bucindolol (HR: 0.80; 95% CI: 0.72 to 0.89; p < 0.001). Adding ED visits increased these numbers to 768 (57%) and 668 (49%), respectively (HR: 0.81; 95% CI: 0.73 to 0.90; p < 0.001). A total of 568 (42%) patients on placebo experienced HFH compared with 476 (35%) patients on bucindolol (HR: 0.78; 95% CI: 0.69 to 0.89; p < 0.001), with a total of 1,333 and 1,124 admissions, respectively. With the same statistical assumptions, using the composite endpoint instead of all-cause mortality would have reduced the trial size by 40% and follow-up duration by 69%. The rate ratio for recurrent events (CVD/HFH) was 0.83 (95% CI: 0.73 to 0.94; p = 0.003).
Conclusions:
Choice of endpoint has major implications for trial size and duration, as well as interpretation of results. The value of broader composite endpoints and inclusion of recurrent events needs further investigation. (Beta Blocker Evaluation in Survival Trial [BEST]; NCT00000560).
Related Concept Videos
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
Comparing the Survival Analysis of Two or More Groups
Clinical Trials
There are four phases in a clinical trial. A phase one...
Crossover Experiments
Crossover designs are performed even with smaller sample sizes since the samples can act as their controls. These are better than simple randomized trials since patients are exposed to all the treatments.
Study Designs in Epidemiology
Observational studies are those where the researcher does not intervene but rather observes natural variations. They include cross-sectional, cohort, and...
Hazard Ratio
For example, in a clinical trial...
