临床终点
医学
临床试验
事件(粒子物理)
心力衰竭
中止
I类和II类错误
代理终结点
内科学
统计
数学
物理
量子力学
作者
Arno Fritsch,Patrick Schlömer,Franco Mendolia,Tobias Mütze,Antje Jahn‐Eimermacher,on behalf of the Recurrent Event Qualification Opinion Consortium
标识
DOI:10.1080/19466315.2021.1945488
摘要
In clinical trials investigating treatments for chronic heart failure (CHF), a standard primary endpoint is the time to the first composite of hospitalization for heart failure or cardiovascular death (CVD). Since many patients experience several hospitalizations, there is interest in including recurrent hospitalizations into the primary endpoint to better capture disease burden. Several analysis methods have been proposed for recurrent event endpoints, mostly for the situation without a terminal event such as CVD. Only some methods explicitly account for terminal events, for example, the joint frailty model. We compare the power and Type I error rate of recurrent event methods with those of time-to-first event methods in the presence of terminal events. A special focus is the situation where treatment affects the risk of CVD. Our investigations are based on a simulation study, for which the scenarios are motivated by CHF trials, and based on bootstraping data from the Val-HeFT and PARADIGM-HF trials. We find that recurrent event methods can in many situations increase power considerably. But this is not always the case, for example, when there is high probability of treatment discontinuation after the first hospitalization. Also, for both recurrent and time-to-first event methods, the Type I error rate can be inflated in case of a detrimental treatment effect on CVD. Based on the simulation results we give recommendations on the choice of endpoint and analysis method for CHF trials.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI