Loading...
 

Print


CompARE is a free on-line platform developed by Moisés Gómez Mateu and professor Guadalupe Gómez Melis to help investigators to:

  • Choose the primary endpoint of a Randomized Clinical Trial.
  • Analyze whether you should use a Composite endpoint as Primary endpoint in time-to-event studies.
  • Compare different scenarios depending on your candidate endpoints.
  • Get helpful numerical and intuitive graphical results.


  • Take a look at the user's guide(external link) to see how it works. Some examples are described.





Future extensions


The following extensions are planned to apply to CompARE:

  • Sample size calculations: CompARE will use all the information provided by the probabilities and hazard ratios to compute the required sample size for a given significance level and power.
  • Other copulas: choices of copulas rather than Frank's are being implemented (Plana-Ripoll and Gómez, 2014).
  • Death in both Relevant and Additional endpoints: Case 4 in (Gómez and Lagakos, 2013) is being implemented and will be released soon.
  • Binary outcomes: CompARE will incorporate decision rules whenever the endpoints for investigation are binary (dichotomous).

References


  • Ferreira-González I, Permanyer-Miralda G, Busse JW, Bryant DM, Montori VM, Alonso-Coello P, Walter SD and Guyatt GH (2007). Methodologic discussions for using and interpreting composite endpoints are limited, but still identify major concerns. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 60, 651–657.
  • Freemantle N, Calvert M, Wood J, Eastaugh J and Griffin C. (2003). Composite outcomes in Randomized Trials. Greater precision but with greater uncertainty? Journal of the American Medical Association, 289, 2554–2559.
  • Gómez G. (2011). Some theoretical thoughts when using a composite endpoint to prove the efficacy of a treatment. International Workshop on Statistical Modelling. Proceedings of the 26th International Workshop on Statistical Modelling, València 14–21. Online http://hdl.handle.net/2117/22571(external link).
  • Gómez G, Gómez-Mateu M (2014). The Asymptotic Relative Efficiency and the ratio of sample sizes when testing two different null hypotheses. SORT. (In press).
  • Gómez G, Gómez-Mateu M, Dafni U (2014). Informed Choice of Composite Endpoints in Cardiovascular Trials. Circulation Cardiovascular and Quality Outcomes, 7, 170-178.
  • Gómez G, Lagakos SW (2013). Statistical considerations when using a composite endpoint for comparing treatment groups. Statistics in Medicine 32, 719–738.
  • Montori VM, Permanyer-Miralda G, Ferreira-González I, Busse JW, Pacheco-Huergo V, Bryant D, Alonso J, Akl EA, Domingo-Salvany A, Mills E, Wu P, Schünemann HJ, Jaeschke R and Guyatt GH (2005). Validity of composite end points in clinical trials. British Medical Journal, 330, 594–596.
  • Plana-Ripoll O, Gómez G (2014). Extension of the ARE method to select the Primary Endpoint in a Randomized Clinical Trial. (Submitted).
  • Schoenfeld D. (1983). Sample-size formula for the proportional-hazards regression model. Biometrics 39, 499–503.
  • Wittkop L, Smith C, Fox Z, Sabin C, Richert L, Aboulker JP, Phillips A, Chêne G, Babiker A and Thiébaut R. on behalf of NEAT-WP4. (2010). Methodological issues in the use of composite endpoints in clinical trials: examples from the HIV field. Clinical Trials, 7, 19–35.


Department of Statistics and Operations Research.
Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, Spain.
moises.gomez.mateu at upc.edu






web analyzer