Analysis of randomized dose-finding-studies: Closure test modifications based on multiple contrast tests

Biometrical Journal

Volumn 39, Issue 4, 1997, Pages 467-479

  Hothorn, L A ^c   Neuhauser M ^a   Koch, H F ^b  

^a ALTANA PHARMA AG   (Germany)

^b Solvay Pharmaceuticals GmbH   (Germany)

^c LEIBNIZ UNIVERSITY HANNOVER   (Germany)

Author keywords

Dose finding, minimum effective dose; Multiple contrast test; Trend test

Indexed keywords

CONTRAST TESTS; DOSE FINDING; DOSE FINDING, MINIMUM EFFECTIVE DOSE; DOSE RESPONSE RELATIONSHIPS; LIKELIHOOD RATIO TESTS; MINIMUM EFFECTIVE DOSE; MULTIPLE CONTRAST TEST; ORDER RESTRICTION; POWER; TREND TESTS;

STATISTICAL TESTS;

EID: 0039268959     PISSN: 03233847     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/bimj.4710390408     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. ARMITAGE, P., 1955: Tests for linear trends in proportions and frequencies. Biometrics 11, 375-386.
2. BARLOW, R. E., BARTHOLOMEW, D. J., BREMNER, J. M., and BRUNK, H. D., 1972: Statistical inference under order restrictions. Wiley, New York.
3. BAUER, P. and BUDDE, M., 1994: Multiple testing for detecting efficient dose steps. Biometr. Journal 36, 3-15.
4. BAUER, P. and RÖHMEL, J., 1995: An adaptive method for establishing a dose response relationship. Statistics in Medicine 14, 1595-1607.
5. BAUER, P., RÖHMEL, J., MAURER, W., and HOTHORN, L. A., 1997: Testing strategies in multidose trials including active control. Submitted to Statistics in Medicine.
6. BECHHOFER, R. E. and DUNNETT, C. W., 1982: Multiple comparisons for orthogonal contrasts: example and table. Technometrics. 24, 213-222.
7. CAPIZZI, T., SURVILL, T. T., HEYSE, J. F., and MALANI, H., 1992: An empirical and simulated comparison of some tests for detecting progressiveness of response with increasing doses of a compound. Biometr. Journal 34, 275-289.
8. D'AGOSTINO, R. B. and HEEREN, T. C., 1991: Multiple comparisons in over the counter drug clinical trials with both positive and placebo controls. Statistics in Medicine 10, 1-6.
9. DUNNETT, C. W., 1955: A multiple comparison procedure for comparing several treatments with a control. J. Amer. Stat. Assoc. 50, 1096-1121.
10. DUNNETT, C. W. and TAMHANE, A. C., 1992: Comparison between a new drug and active and placebo controls in an efficacy clinical trial. Statistics in Medicine 11, 1057-1063.
11. FLIGNER, M. A., AND WOLFE, D. A., 1982: Distribution-free tests for comparing several treatments with a control. Statistica Neerlandica 36, 119-127.
12. GASTWIRTH, J. L., 1985: The use of maximin efficiency robust tests in combining contingency tables and survival analysis. J. Amer. Stat. Assoc. 80, 380-384.
13. HAUSCHKE, D. and HOTHORN, L. A., 1997: Safety assessment in toxicology studies: proof of safety versus proof of hazard. In: S.-C. CHOW and J.-P. LIU (eds.): Design and analysis of animal studies in pharmaceutical development, Chapter 6. Marcel Dekker, New York, 197-225.
14. HOTHORN, L. A., 1989: Robustness study on Williams and Shirley procedure, with application in toxicology. Biometr. Journal 31, 891-903.
15. HOTHORN, L. A., 1995: Biostatistical analysis of experimental designs with a positive control group in toxicology. In: J. VOLLMAR (ed.): Biometrie in der chemisch-pharmazeutischen Industrie. Vol. 6. Fischer Verlag Stuttgart, 19-26.
16. HOTHORN, L. A., 1995a: Varianten des Abschlußtests zur Auswertung präklinischer Studien. In: H. J. TRAMPISCH, S. LANGE (eds.): Medizinische Forschung-Ärztliches Handeln. Medizinische Informatik, Biometrie und Epidemiologie. Volume 80. MMV Medizin Verlag München, 117-121.
17. HOTHORN, L. A. and LEHMACHER W., 1991: A simple testing procedure control versus k treatments for one-sided ordered alternatives, with application in toxicology. Biometr. Journal 33, 179-189.
18. HOTHORN, L. A. and NEUHÄUSER, M., 1997: A simple modification of a trend test based on nested decompensation: stabilizing the power for different shapes of the dose-response relationship. Report University of Hannover.
19. JONCKHEERE, A. R., 1954: A distribution-free k-sample test against ordered alternatives. Biometrika 41, 133-145.
20. MAGEL, R. C., AND MAGEL, K. I., 1986: A comparison of some nonparametric tests for the simple tree alternative. Commun. Statist. B 15, 435-449.
21. MARCUS, R., PERITZ, E., and GABRIEL, K. B., 1976: On closed testing procedures with special reference to ordered analysis of variance. Biometrika 63, 655-660.
22. MCDERMOTT, M. P. and MUDHOLKAR, G. S., 1993: A simple approach to testing homogeneity of order-constrained means. J. Amer. Stat. Assoc. 88, 1371-1379.
23. MUKERJEE, H., ROBERTSON, T., and WRIGHT, F. T., 1986: Multiple contrast tests for testing against a simple tree ordering. In: R. DYKSTRA, et al. (eds.): Advances in order restricted statistical inference. Springer Verlag, Berlin, 203-230.
24. MUKERJEE, H., ROBERSTON, T., and WRIGHT, F. T., 1987: Comparison of several treatments with a control using multiple contrasts. J. Amer. Stat. Assoc. 82, 902-910.
25. NATHOFF, I. L. and ATTWOOD, M. R., 1990: Cilazapril. Cardiovascular Drug Reviews 8, 1-24.
26. NEUHÄUSER, M., 1996: Trendtests bei a priori unbekanntem Erwartungswertprofil (engl.: Trend tests for a priori unknown expected value profile). Unpublished Ph. D. Thesis, University of Dortmund.
27. NEUHÄUSER, M. and HOTHORN, L. A., 1997: Trend Tests for Dichotomous Endpoints with Application to Carcinogenicity Studies. Drug Information Journal 31, 463-469.
28. NEUHÄUSER, M. and HOTHORN, L. A., 1998: Exact Cochran-Armitage trend test for a priori unknown dose-response shapes. Submitted to Biometrics.
29. NEUHÄUSER, M. and HOTHORN, L., 1998a: An analogue of Jonckheere's trend test for parametric and dichotomous data. Submitted to Biometr. Journal.
30. PODGOR, M. J., GASTWIRTH, J. L. and MEHTA, C. R., 1996: Efficiency robust tests of independence in contingency tables with ordered classifications. Statistics in Medicine 15, 2095-2105.
31. ROM, D. R., COSTELLO, R. J., and CONNELL, L. T., 1994: On closed test procedures for dose-response analysis. Statistics in Medicine 13, 1583-1596.
32. RUBERG, S. J., 1989: Contrasts for identifying the minimum effective dose. J. Amer. Stat. Assoc. 84, 816-822.
33. SAS Institute, Inc., 1996: SAS/STAT software Version 6.11, SAS Institute Inc. Cary, NC, USA.
34. SHAFFER, J. P., 1986: Modified sequentially rejective multiple test procedures. J. Amer. Stat. Assoc. 81, 826-831.
35. SHIRLEY, E. A., 1977: A non-parametric equivalent of Williams' test for contrasting increasing dose levels of a treatment. Biometrics 33, 386-389.
36. TAMHANE A. C., HOCHBERG, Y., and DUNNETT, C. W., 1996: Multiple test procedures for dose finding. Biometrics 52, 21-37.
37. WILLIAMS, D. A., 1971: A test for differences between treatment means when several dose levels are compared with a zero dose control. Biometrics 27, 103-117.
38. WILLIAMS, D. A., 1972: The comparison of several dose levels with a zero dose control. Biometrics 28, 519-531.