Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Methodological analysis demonstrates improved statistical power with controlled type I error in rare disease trials, suggesting a robust approach for borrowing external control data.
Leveraging external control data has been used to enhance the efficiency of clinical trials, especially in rare diseases where recruitment is often challenging. However, directly pooling data from different studies without appropriate adjustments can lead to biased results when populations differ across these studies. In addition to limited sample sizes, trials for rare diseases commonly assess treatment efficacy through multiple clinical endpoints using composite endpoints. The win ratio has gained attention for composite endpoint analysis, as it enables prioritized comparisons that account for the relative clinical importance of each endpoint. Motivated by these two challenges, we proposed novel propensity score (PS)-integrated win ratio methods to incorporate external control data. Specifically, two PS-based weighting approaches, PS-ratio and PS-difference, are proposed to adjust for between-study baseline covariate differences, thereby mitigating the risk of potential bias. Simulation studies and real-world case analysis demonstrate that the proposed methods consistently improve statistical power while maintaining proper Type I error control. This framework offers a robust and practical solution for composite endpoint analysis using external controls, with particular relevance to rare disease trials and regulatory decision-making.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chen et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: