Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32552451›Full record

ArticleJournal of biopharmaceutical statistics2020

The inverse-probability-of-censoring weighting (IPCW) adjusted win ratio statistic: an unbiased estimator in the presence of independent censoring.

Gaohong Dong, Lu Mao, Bo Huang, Margaret Gamalo-Siebers, Jiuzhou Wang, GuangLei Yu, David C Hoaglin

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of biopharmaceutical statistics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed
5.9field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

37 citing papers in PubMed, 63 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Deep survival modeling to predict future cognitive impairment in unimpaired adults.The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences · 2026
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Gaohong DongiStats Inc ., Long Island City, New York, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9848-1329
Lu MaoDepartment of Biostatistics and Medical Informatics, University of Wisconsin , Madison, Wisconsin, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8626-9822
Bo HuangPfizer Inc ., Groton, Connecticut, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3088-9328
Margaret Gamalo-SiebersEli Lilly & Company , Indianapolis, Indian, USA.
Jiuzhou WangImmunoGen Inc ., Waltham, Massachusetts, USA.
GuangLei YuEli Lilly & Company , Indianapolis, Indian, USA.
David C HoaglinDepartment of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Medical School , Worcester, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1336-181X
Eli Lilly (United States) · USImmunoGen (United States) · USJ F Ingram State Technical College · USPfizer (United States) · USUniversity of Massachusetts Chan Medical School · USUniversity of Wisconsin–Madison · US

Funding

Novel Statistical Methods for Complex Time-to-Event Data in Cardiovascular Clinical TrialsR01HL149875 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI Lu Mao · 2020 to 2026
$2.4M
NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL149875
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The win ratio method has received much attention in methodological research, ad hoc analyses, and designs of prospective studies. As the primary analysis, it supported the approval of tafamidis for the treatment of cardiomyopathy to reduce cardiovascular mortality and cardiovascular-related hospitalization. However, its dependence on censoring is a potential shortcoming. In this article, we propose the inverse-probability-of-censoring weighting (IPCW) adjusted win ratio statistic (i.e., the IPCW-adjusted win ratio statistic) to overcome censoring issues. We consider independent censoring, common censoring across endpoints, and right censoring. We develop an asymptotic variance estimator for the logarithm of the IPCW-adjusted win ratio statistic and evaluate it via simulation. Our simulation studies show that, as the amount of censoring increases, the unadjusted win proportions may decrease greatly. Consequently, the bias of the unadjusted win ratio estimate may increase greatly, producing either an overestimate or an underestimate. We demonstrate theoretically and through simulation that the IPCW-adjusted win ratio statistic gives an unbiased estimate of treatment effect.

Indexed as

BiasCardiovascular DiseasesClinical Trials as TopicComputer SimulationData Interpretation, StatisticalDisease ProgressionHospitalizationHumansModels, StatisticalMonoclonal Gammopathy of Undetermined SignificanceNeoplasms, Plasma CellProbabilityResearch DesignTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeCensoringhazard ratioinverse-probability-of-censoring weightingIPCWwin probabilitywin proportionwin ratio

Identifiers

PMID32552451
PMCPMC7538385
OpenAlexW3036141416

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.