Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2604.04360

Generalized win fraction regression for composite survival endpoints

Zhiqiang Cao·Xi Fang·Fan Li
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

We propose a generalized win fraction regression framework for prioritized composite survival outcomes. The framework models the conditional win fraction through a chosen link function (including identity, logit, or probit), thereby accommodating multi-component time-to-event endpoints within a unified regression structure. To handle right censoring, we construct inverse-probability-of-censoring-weighted estimating equations that target the win fraction as if censoring were absent. Under the identity link, regression parameters characterize covariate associations on the natural win fraction scale. Under the logit link, they characterize the log odds of winning -- a new and complementary effect measure that treats ties as failures to win, imposing a more conservative standard than the win ratio or win odds. When there are no ties, the logit win fraction model reduces to proportional win fraction regression; moreover, the unweighted version of our estimating equations numerically coincides with the proportional win fraction point estimator regardless of ties. We establish large-sample properties of the proposed estimators and derive a consistent sandwich variance estimator that accounts for uncertainty from the estimated censoring weights. Extensive simulations examine finite-sample performance across link functions and censoring rates, and our method is illustrated through a reanalysis of the HF-ACTION clinical trial.

Explore related subjects

stat.ME

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Zhiqiang Cao, Xi Fang, Fan Li. 2026-04-06. Generalized win fraction regression for composite survival endpoints. https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.04360

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Surprise Reduction and Nullification in Bayesian and Inverse Bayesian Inference under Ambiguous Prediction-Error Attribution

In non-stationary environments, prediction errors may signal environmental change or transient outliers, and adaptive systems must track such changes without overreacting to outliers. We distinguish surprise reduction, which updates beliefs to fit observations, from surprise nullification, which weakens constraints imposed by the predictive structure, and formalize both within Bayesian and inverse Bayesian (BIB) inference. Belief and likelihood updates are derived from variational objectives sharing a nullification strength, determined endogenously by minimizing surprise under the candidate post-update predictive distribution. In the Gaussian case, nullification expands belief and likelihood variances by a common factor relative to standard Bayesian updating, leaving the ratio unchanged. BIB thus defers attribution of the prediction error, committing to neither latent-state change nor observation-process uncertainty. The nullification strength is carried over as a candidate and is maintained or released according to the predictive surprise of the next observation. In a mean estimation task with outliers and changepoints, no scanned parameter setting of a Sage-Husa-type adaptive Kalman filter, fixed-strength BIB variant, or belief-forgetting-only variant outperforms BIB in both changepoint tracking and post-outlier stability. An oracle-informed reduced Bayesian model tracks changepoints better but is less stable after outliers. Although BIB maintains no explicit hypotheses about changepoints or outliers, it generates event-dependent dynamics. The learning rate increases after changepoints, whereas after outliers, nullification is released, and this increase is suppressed. Deferring attribution and letting subsequent observations differentiate the responses may constitute a principle of adaptive inference in non-stationary environments.

stat.ME↗
arXiv2026

Generalized Ridge Refitting for the Lasso and Prediction Improvement Bounds

We study a class of Lasso based estimators obtained by applying a quadratic correction on the Lasso equicorrelation set. The penalty matrix determines both the magnitude and geometry of the correction and contains, among other cases, the isotropic Lasso--Ridge correction, least squares refitting, Gram proportional interpolation between the Lasso and least squares, and coordinate specific penalties. We first derive a closed form representation and isolate the positive gain component of the resulting prediction improvement. We then control the remaining stochastic linear term in expectation by localizing the random signed equicorrelation model around a deterministic reference support. This yields a finite sample expectation bound that explicitly accounts for the randomness induced by Lasso model selection. The resulting decomposition provides a unified framework for understanding when Lasso based quadratic corrections can improve prediction.

stat.ME↗
arXiv2026

Discretization in covariate-adaptive randomization: gains and losses

Covariate-adaptive randomization(CAR) is widely implemented in clinical trials to balance prognostic covariates across treatment arms. Continuous covariates are often discretized into strata in practice, yet their consequences are not clearly understood. This paper provides a comprehensive study of the impact of discretization on both the CAR design process and the inferential results thereafter. We establish the asymptotic properties of both imbalance measures and treatment effect estimators under discretized and non-discretized settings. Practical recommendations are given on when and how discretization should be employed. We show that discretization in design is generally recommended, as it enhances robustness against model misspecification. However, if the true model is known, the most efficient strategy is to balance covariates according to that model in the design. The theoretical results are corroborated by extensive simulation studies and an empirical application to a diabetes trial dataset. Together, the results clarify the gains and losses of discretization in CAR and pave the way for learning impact of discretization to other designs and beyond.

stat.ME↗