Composite End Points in Clinical Research: A Time for Reappraisal.

Advances in cardiovascular medicine fueled by innovative clinical trials have dramatically improved the lives of patients worldwide. Commensurate with this progress has been a decline in morbid and mortal events. Accordingly, an increased propensity to collate patient outcomes in clinical trials has emerged that combines death and nonfatal complications into a single composite event. Despite the acknowledged benefits in trial efficiency from such an approach, this method assumes uniform directionality of each component, does not distinguish the relative clinical significance of each, and counts only the first occurrence of any event in the final tally within a conventional time to first event analysis. In this article, we evaluate the criticisms that have been leveled at this approach and provide an overview of recently published phase III cardiovascular trials using primary composite end points. We then explore what to anticipate from the large cohort of as-yet unpublished clinical trials in this arena. Last, we propose a variety of novel approaches that use composite end points and suggest a path forward to enhancing their use in future clinical trials.

[1]  R. Betensky,et al.  An optimal Wilcoxon–Mann–Whitney test of mortality and a continuous outcome , 2018, Statistical methods in medical research.

[2]  M. Wolbers,et al.  Weighted analysis of composite endpoints with simultaneous inference for flexible weight constraints , 2016, Statistics in medicine.

[3]  P. Brown,et al.  Composite End Points in Clinical Trials of Heart Failure Therapy: How Do We Measure the Effect Size? , 2017, Circulation. Heart failure.

[4]  O. Alfieri,et al.  Computing Methods for Composite Clinical Endpoints in Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Revascularization: A Post Hoc Analysis of the DELTA Registry. , 2016, JACC. Cardiovascular interventions.

[5]  M. Packer Development and Evolution of a Hierarchical Clinical Composite End Point for the Evaluation of Drugs and Devices for Acute and Chronic Heart Failure: A 20-Year Perspective , 2016, Circulation.

[6]  S. Pocock,et al.  Everolimus-Eluting Stents or Bypass Surgery for Left Main Coronary Artery Disease. , 2016, The New England journal of medicine.

[7]  J. Cigarroa,et al.  Further Evolution of the ACC/AHA Clinical Practice Guideline Recommendation Classification System: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines. , 2016, Circulation.

[8]  P. Armstrong,et al.  Impact of weighted composite compared to traditional composite endpoints for the design of randomized controlled trials , 2015, Statistical methods in medical research.

[9]  B. Zinman,et al.  Empagliflozin, Cardiovascular Outcomes, and Mortality in Type 2 Diabetes. , 2015, The New England journal of medicine.

[10]  P. Armstrong,et al.  Applying novel methods to assess clinical outcomes: insights from the TRILOGY ACS trial. , 2015, European heart journal.

[11]  P. Armstrong,et al.  Incorporating patient preferences into clinical trial design: results of the opinions of patients on treatment implications of new studies (OPTIONS) project. , 2015, American heart journal.

[12]  J. Spertus,et al.  Rethinking Composite End Points in Clinical Trials: Insights From Patients and Trialists , 2014, Circulation.

[13]  G. Fonarow,et al.  ACC/AHA statement on cost/value methodology in clinical practice guidelines and performance measures: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Performance Measures and Task Force on Practice Guidelines. , 2014, Circulation.

[14]  G. Heinze,et al.  Competing risks analyses: objectives and approaches , 2014, European heart journal.

[15]  P. Armstrong,et al.  Evaluation of early percutaneous coronary intervention vs. standard therapy after fibrinolysis for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: contribution of weighting the composite endpoint. , 2013, European heart journal.

[16]  P. Armstrong,et al.  The power of more than one. , 2013, Circulation.

[17]  Joel Huber,et al.  Weighting composite endpoints in clinical trials: essential evidence for the heart team. , 2012, The Annals of thoracic surgery.

[18]  Fred S Apple,et al.  Third universal definition of myocardial infarction , 2012 .

[19]  S. Pocock,et al.  The win ratio: a new approach to the analysis of composite endpoints in clinical trials based on clinical priorities , 2011, European heart journal.

[20]  M. Pfeffer,et al.  Days alive and out of hospital and the patient journey in patients with heart failure: Insights from the candesartan in heart failure: assessment of reduction in mortality and morbidity (CHARM) program. , 2011, American heart journal.

[21]  R. Califf,et al.  Refining clinical trial composite outcomes: an application to the Assessment of the Safety and Efficacy of a New Thrombolytic-3 (ASSENT-3) trial. , 2011, American heart journal.

[22]  K. Anstrom,et al.  From batting average to wins above replacement to composite end points-refining clinical research using baseball statistical methods. , 2011, American heart journal.

[23]  G. Mitchell Definition, Reporting, and Interpretation of Composite Outcomes in Clinical Trials: Systematic Review , 2011 .

[24]  S. Kaul,et al.  Trial and error. How to avoid commonly encountered limitations of published clinical trials. , 2010, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[25]  L. Morrison,et al.  Routine early angioplasty after fibrinolysis for acute myocardial infarction. , 2009, The New England journal of medicine.

[26]  Sunil V. Rao,et al.  Baseline Risk of Major Bleeding in Non–ST-Segment–Elevation Myocardial Infarction: The CRUSADE (Can Rapid risk stratification of Unstable angina patients Suppress ADverse outcomes with Early implementation of the ACC/AHA guidelines) Bleeding Score , 2009, Circulation.

[27]  klaguia Making an Impact: A Preferred Framework and Indicators to Measure Returns on Investment in Health Research , 2009 .

[28]  E. Antman,et al.  Prasugrel versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes. , 2007, The New England journal of medicine.

[29]  Sanjay Kaul,et al.  Trial and error. How to avoid commonly encountered limitations of published clinical trials. , 2010, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[30]  A. Skene,et al.  Addition of clopidogrel to aspirin and fibrinolytic therapy for myocardial infarction with ST-segment elevation. , 2005, The New England journal of medicine.

[31]  Nick Freemantle,et al.  Composite outcomes in randomized trials: greater precision but with greater uncertainty? , 2003, JAMA.

[32]  J. Cleland How to assess new treatments for the management of heart failure: composite scoring systems to assess the patients’ clinical journey , 2002, European journal of heart failure.

[33]  M. Nieminen,et al.  For Personal Use. Only Reproduce with Permission from the Lancet Publishing Group , 2022 .

[34]  E. Braunwald,et al.  Use of composite endpoints in thrombolysis trials of acute myocardial infarction. , 1993, The American journal of cardiology.

[35]  P. Kudenchuk,et al.  Prehospital-initiated vs hospital-initiated thrombolytic therapy. The Myocardial Infarction Triage and Intervention Trial. , 1993, JAMA.

[36]  E J Topol,et al.  Left ventricular ejection fraction may not be useful as an end point of thrombolytic therapy comparative trials. , 1990, Circulation.

[37]  L. J. Wei,et al.  Regression analysis of multivariate incomplete failure time data by modeling marginal distributions , 1989 .

[38]  R. Gill,et al.  Cox's regression model for counting processes: a large sample study : (preprint) , 1982 .