Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Consider the choice of outcome for overall treatment benefit in a clinical trial which measures the first time to each of several clinical events. We describe several new variants of the win ratio that incorporate the time spent in each clinical state over the common follow‐up, where clinical state means the worst clinical event that has occurred by that time. One version allows restriction so that death during follow‐up is most important, while time spent in other clinical states is still accounted for. Three other variants are described; one is based on the average pairwise win time, one creates a continuous outcome for each participant based on expected win times against a reference distribution and another that uses the estimated distributions of clinical state to compare the treatment arms. Finally, a combination testing approach is described to give robust power for detecting treatment benefit across a broad range of alternatives. These new methods are designed to be closer to the overall treatment benefit/harm from a patient's perspective, compared to the ordinary win ratio. The new methods are compared to the composite event approach and the ordinary win ratio. Simulations show that when overall treatment benefit on death is substantial, the variants based on either the participants' expected win times (EWTs) against a reference distribution or estimated clinical state distributions have substantially higher power than either the pairwise comparison or composite event methods. The methods are illustrated by re‐analysis of the trial heart failure: a controlled trial investigating outcomes of exercise training.
Troendle et al. (Wed,) studied this question.