Use of Ordinal Outcomes in Vascular Prevention Trials

Abstract

Background and Purpose-Vascular prevention trials mostly count "yes/no" (binary) outcome events, eg, stroke/no stroke. Analysis of ordered categorical vascular events (eg, fatal stroke/nonfatal stroke/no stroke) is clinically relevant and could be more powerful statistically. Although this is not a novel idea in the statistical community, ordinal outcomes have not been applied to stroke prevention trials in the past. Methods-Summary data on stroke, myocardial infarction, combined vascular events, and bleeding were obtained by treatment group from published vascular prevention trials. Data were analyzed using 10 statistical approaches which allow comparison of 2 ordinal or binary treatment groups. The results for each statistical test for each trial were then compared using Friedman 2-way analysis of variance with multiple comparison procedures. Results-Across 85 trials (335 305 subjects) the test results differed substantially so that approaches which used the ordinal nature of stroke events (fatal/nonfatal/no stroke) were more efficient than those which combined the data to form 2 groups (PϽ0.0001). The most efficient tests were bootstrapping the difference in mean rank, Mann-Whitney U test, and ordinal logistic regression; 4-and 5-level data were more efficient still. Similar findings were obtained for myocardial infarction, combined vascular outcomes, and bleeding. The findings were consistent across different types, designs and sizes of trial, and for the different types of intervention. Conclusions-When analyzing vascular events from prevention trials, statistical tests which use ordered categorical data are more efficient and are more likely to yield reliable results than binary tests. This approach gives additional information on treatment effects by severity of event and will allow trials to be smaller.

Analysis of an ordinal endpoint for use in evaluating treatments for severe influenza requiring hospitalization

“…18–21 In these trials, relative to FLU-IVIG, different parameter values (e.g. treatment effect size) may modify the magnitude of the effect of the four factors evaluated in this article on power.…”

The relative efficiency of time-to-threshold and rate of change in longitudinal data

“…A meta-analysis of the orthopedic surgery randomized trial literature found those trials with continuous outcomes had greater power on average than those with a dichotomous outcome, an outcome analytically equivalent to time-to-event [7], and a greater proportion of the continuous outcomes trials attained acceptable power (>80%) [8]. Similar observations were made in the fields of rheumatoid arthritis [9] and stroke [10]. Reliable continuous biomarker surrogates have accelerated the study of HIV [11], and are still actively being sought, for example, for prostate cancer [12, 13] and AD [14].…”

METACOHORTS for the study of vascular disease and its contribution to cognitive decline and neurodegeneration: An initiative of the Joint Programme for Neurodegenerative Disease Research

“…We initially invited participation from investigators of studies in Europe through the JPND Vascular Disease group, relevant studies listed in the JPND report [14], networks, and studies known to them, for example, Dementia Platform UK, the German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE), and “Constances” in France; however, investigators based in North America, Australasia, and the Asia Pacific Region also expressed interest and were included. We recognized that the survey was unlikely to capture all studies but aimed to capture a broad sample, particularly from the vascular disease perspective (including clinical trials), as these are under-represented in other dementia initiatives [14], [18], [19], [20].…”