Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 2, 2025

A Method of Trigonometric Modelling of Seasonal Variation Demonstrated with Multiple Sclerosis Relapse Data
Published on: December 9, 2015
Investigations of methods for multiple time-to-event endpoints: A chronic myeloid leukemia data analysis
Hongji Wu1, Yawen Hou2, Zheng Chen1
1Department of Biostatistics, School of Public Health (Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Tropical Disease Research), Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Background:
In randomized controlled trials, multiple time-to-event endpoints are commonly used to determine treatment effects. However, choosing an appropriate method to address multiple endpoints, according to different purposes of clinical practice, is a challenge for researchers.
Methods:
We applied single endpoint, composite endpoint and win ratio analysis to chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) data to illustrate the distinctions with different multiple endpoints, including relapse, recovery and death after transplantation.
Results:
Regarding relapse and death, the hazard ratio in single endpoint analysis (HRs ) were 1.281 (95% CI: 1.061-1.546) and hazard ratio in composite endpoint analysis (HRc ) were 1.286 (95% CI: 1.112-1.486) and 1/WR (win ratio) was 1.292 (95% CI: 1.115-1.497) indicated a similar negative effect for non-prophylaxis patients. However, when considering recovery and death, the corresponding HRs = 1.280 (95% CI: 1.056-1.552) may not be enough to describe the effect on death with nonproportional hazards (p < 0.05), and for the composite endpoint analysis, the HRc = 0.828 (95% CI: 0.740-0.926) cannot quantify and interpret the clinical effect on the composite endpoint with the combination of recovery and death, while the 1/WR = 1.351 (95% CI: 1.207-1.513) showed an unfavourable effect for non-prophylaxis patients CONCLUSIONS: When dealing with multiple endpoints, single endpoints, researchers may choose single endpoints, composite endpoints and WR analysis due to different clinical applications and purposes. However, both single and composite endpoint analyses are hazard-based measures, and thus, the proportional hazards assumption should be considered. Moreover, composite endpoint analysis should be applied for endpoints with similar clinical meanings but not opposing implications. Win ratio analysis can be considered for different clinical importance of multiple endpoints, but the meaning of 'winner' needs to be specified for desired or undesired endpoints.
More Related Videos
09:57Comprehensive Protocol to Sample and Process Bone Marrow for Measuring Measurable Residual Disease and Leukemic Stem Cells in Acute Myeloid Leukemia
Published on: March 5, 2018
06:55Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting Propensity Score using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index
Published on: January 8, 2020
Related Concept Videos
Comparing the Survival Analysis of Two or More Groups
Kaplan-Meier Approach
Cancer Survival Analysis
Introduction To Survival Analysis
The primary goal of survival analysis is to estimate survival time—the time...
Assumptions of Survival Analysis
Actuarial Approach
Consider the example of a high-risk surgical procedure with significant early-stage mortality. A two-year clinical study is conducted,...