Heart failure & cardiomyopathies
Win Ratio Analyses Using a Modified Hierarchical Composite Outcome: Insights From PARAGLIDE-HF
Authors' conclusion
Multiple WR sensitivity analyses support a consistent treatment benefit of sacubitril/valsartan versus valsartan in patients with ejection fraction >40% to 60%.
Study context
- Population
- Heart failure (HF) patients with EF >40%; sensitivity analyses in prespecified subgroup with EF ≤60% (N = 357)EF ≤60% subgroup n = 357
- Participants
- 466 patients
- Comparison
- Sacubitril/valsartan vs valsartan
- Primary endpoint
- Hierarchical outcome:
- CV death
- HF hospitalizations
- Urgent HF visits
- NT-proBNP change with 25% decrease a win
Methodological detailswin ratio sensitivity analysis, prespecified subgroup
- Win ratio sensitivity analysis
- Prespecified subgroup
Primary result
As reported in the abstract
WR sensitivity analyses (EF ≤60% subgroup)
Sacubitril/valsartan vs ValsartanWin ratio (95% CI)
Excluding NT-proBNP; WO 1.12 (95% CI 1.00-1.26)
1.49(1.00–2.22)
NT-proBNP threshold 10%; WO 1.27 (95% CI 1.04-1.56)
1.41(1.06–1.89)
NT-proBNP threshold 50%; WO 1.25 (95% CI 1.06-1.48)
1.54(1.11–2.12)
Incl. renal outcomes; WO 1.28 (95% CI 1.05-1.56)
1.44(1.07–1.94)
Further findings
| Outcome | WR (95% CI) | |
|---|---|---|
| Primary hierarchical outcome, EF ≤60% subgroup | 1.46 (1.08–1.97) | |
| 0.512Win ratio (log scale) |
Original publication
Win Ratio Analyses Using a Modified Hierarchical Composite Outcome: Insights From PARAGLIDE-HF. Am Heart J. Published 4 November 2024. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →