The New England Journal of Statistics in Data Science

Conventional methods for analyzing composite endpoints in clinical trials often only focus on the time to the first occurrence of all events in the composite. Therefore, they have inherent limitations because the individual patients’ first event can be the outcome of lesser clinical importance. To overcome this limitation, the concept of the win ratio (WR), which accounts for the relative priorities of the components and gives appropriate priority to the more clinically important event, was examined. For example, because mortality has a higher priority than hospitalization, it is reasonable to give a higher priority when obtaining the WR. In this paper, we evaluate three innovative WR methods (stratified matched, stratified unmatched, and unstratified unmatched) for two and multiple components under binary and survival composite endpoints. We compare these methods to traditional ones, including the Cox regression, O’Brien’s rank-sum-type test, and the contingency table for controlling study Type I error rate. We also incorporate these approaches into two-stage enrichment designs with the possibility of sample size adaptations to gain efficiency for rare disease studies.