Application of the Wei–Lachin multivariate one-directional test to multiple event-time outcomes

Abstract

Background/aims:

Cardiovascular outcome trials, among others, aim to assess the beneficial effects of a treatment on multiple event-time outcomes, such as the time to a myocardial infarction and the time to a stroke. The traditional approach is to conduct a simple analysis of a composite outcome defined as the time to the first component event using a logrank test or the Cox Proportional Hazards regression model. This ignores information from other component events after the first. The composite outcome analysis also treats all initial outcome events as equally important, for example, non-fatal myocardial infarction is as important as cardiovascular death.

Methods:

Herein, we describe the application of the Wei–Lachin multivariate one-sided (or one-directional) test to the analysis of multiple event-time outcomes. The test is based on the unweighted mean of the treatment group coefficients from individual Cox proportional hazards models fit to the outcomes, where the covariance of the set of coefficients is obtained from a partitioning of the information sandwich estimate. A weighted test is also described, weighing the outcomes by a scoring of their clinical importance. These and other methods are compared with application to the Prevention of Events with Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibition cardiovascular outcome study.

Results:

The Wei–Lachin test provides an inference with strong control of the type 1 error probability on the difference between groups for the set of outcomes considered. However, it does not provide an inference on the individual components specifically with control of the overall type 1 error probability. By direct computation of relative efficiency and by simulation, we show that the power of the Wei–Lachin one-directional test can be greater than that of the traditional composite outcome analysis based on the time to the first observed component event.

Conclusion:

The Wei–Lachin multivariate one-directional test may be more powerful than the traditional analysis of a composite outcome defined as the time to the first component outcomes experienced by each subject.

Keywords

Composite outcome multivariate one-directional test event-time data Wei–Lachin test

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bakal

Westerhout

Armstrong

. Impact of weighted composite compared to traditional composite endpoints for the design of randomized controlled trials. Stat Methods Med Res. Epub ahead of print 24 January 2014. DOI: 10.1177/0962280211436004.

Pocock

Ariti

Collier

. The win ratio: a new approach to the analysis of composite endpoints in clinical trials based on clinical priorities. Eur Heart J 2012; 33: 176–182.

Claggett

Tian

Castagno

. Treatment selections using risk-benefit profiles based on data from comparative randomized clinical trials with multiple endpoints. Biostatistics 2015; 16: 60–72.

Alosh

Bretz

Huque

. Advanced multiplicity adjustment methods in clinical trials. Stat Med 2014; 33: 693–713.

Wei

Lachin

. Two-sample asymptotically distribution-free tests for incomplete multivariate observations. J Am Stat Assoc 1984; 79: 653–661.

Lachin

. Some large sample size distribution-free estimators and tests for multivariate partially incomplete observations from two populations. Stat Med 1992; 11: 1151–1170.

Lachin

. Applications of the Wei-Lachin multivariate one-sided test for multiple outcomes on possibly different scales. PLoS ONE 2014; 9(10): e108784.

Pipper

Ritz

Bisgaard

. A versatile method for confirmatory evaluation of the effects of a covariate in multiple models. J Roy Stat Soc C: App 2012; 61: 315–326.

Lin

Wei

. The robust inference for the Cox proportional hazards model. J Am Stat Assoc 1989; 84: 1074–1078.

10.

Wei

Lin

Weissfeld

. Regression analysis of multivariate incomplete failure time data by modeling marginal distributions. J Am Stat Assoc 1989; 84: 1065–1073.

11.

Lin

. Cox regression analysis of multivariate failure time data: the marginal approach. Stat Med 1994; 13: 2233–2247.

12.

Prentice

Kalbfleisch

Peterson

. The analysis of failure times in the presence of competing risks. Biometrics 1978; 34: 541–554.

13.

Fine

Gray

. A proportional hazards model for the subdistribution of a competing risk. J Am Stat Assoc 1999; 94: 496–509.

14.

Frick

. A maximin linear test and its application to Lachin’s data. Commun Stat A: Theor 1994; 23: 1021–1029.

15.

Frick

. Comparing trials with multiple outcomes: the multivariate one-sided hypothesis with unknown covariances. Biomet J 1995; 8: 909–917.

16.

Lachin

Foulkes

. Evaluation of sample size and power for analyses of survival with allowance for non-uniform patient entry, losses to follow-up, non-compliance and stratification. Biometrics 1986; 42: 507–519.

17.

The PEACE Trial Investigators. Angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibition in stable coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med 2004; 351: 2058–2068.

18.

Therneau

Grambsch

. Modeling survival data: extending the Cox model. New York: Springer-Verlag.

19.

Lachin

. Biostatistical methods: the assessment of relative risks. 2nd ed. New York: Wiley, 2011.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.25 MB

0.00 MB