Methodological review demonstrates how composite end points alter event frequency and trial power, highlighting the need to evaluate competing events and bias.
Summary Composite end points are common primary outcomes in clinical trials. Their main benefit of utilizing a composite outcome is increasing the number of primary outcome events, meaning fewer participants are required to deliver an adequately powered trial. By combining multiple important end points in the primary outcome rather than having to select only 1, composite end points potentially make clinically meaningful benefits easier to detect and avoid ranking outcomes hierarchically. However, there are a number of important considerations when designing and interpreting clinical trials that utilize composite end points. In this Statistical Primer, issues with composite end points such as competing events, halo effect, risk of bias, time-to-event limitations and the win ratio are discussed in the context of real world clinical trials.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dayan et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: