Analysis of exacerbation rates in asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: Example from the TRISTAN study

Pharmaceutical Statistics

Volumn 6, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 89-97

  Keene, Oliver N ^a   Jones, Mark R K ^a   Lane, Peter W ^a   Anderson, Julie ^a  

^a GLAXOSMITHKLINE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Multiple events; Negative binomial; Overdispersion; Poisson; Recurrent events; TRISTAN

Indexed keywords

FLUTICASONE; FLUTICASONE PROPIONATE PLUS SALMETEROL; PLACEBO; SALMETEROL;

ARTICLE; ASTHMA; BINOMIAL DISTRIBUTION; CHRONIC OBSTRUCTIVE LUNG DISEASE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISEASE EXACERBATION; DOUBLE BLIND PROCEDURE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MATHEMATICAL ANALYSIS; MONOTHERAPY; NONPARAMETRIC TEST; POISSON DISTRIBUTION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; TIME SERIES ANALYSIS;

ALBUTEROL; ANDROSTADIENES; ASTHMA; DOUBLE-BLIND METHOD; DRUG THERAPY, COMBINATION; HUMANS; MODELS, STATISTICAL; PLACEBOS; POISSON DISTRIBUTION; PULMONARY DISEASE, CHRONIC OBSTRUCTIVE;

EID: 34250620564     PISSN: 15391604     EISSN: 15391612     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/pst.250     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. Calverley P, Pauwels R, Vestbo J et al. Combined salmeterol and fluticasone in the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a randomized controlled trial. Lancet 2003; 361:449-456.
2. Koch GG, Atkinson SS, Stokes ME. Poisson regression. In Encylopedia of Statistical Sciences, vol. 7, Kotz S, Johnson NL (eds). Wiley: New York, 1986; 32-41.
3. McCullagh P, Nelder JA. Generalized Linear Models (2 edn). Chapman & Hall: London, 1989.
4. Suissa S. Statistical treatment of exacerbations in therapeutic trials of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine 2006; 173:842-846.
5. Metcalfe C, Thompson SG. The importance of varying the event generation process in simulation studies of statistical methods for recurrent events. Statistics in Medicine 2006; 25:165-179.
6. Koch GG, Sollecito WA. Statistical considerations in the design, analysis, and interpretation of comparative clinical trials. Drug Information Journal 1984; 18:131-151.
7. Quade D. Rank analysis of covariance. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1967; 62: 1187-1200.
8. Keene ON. Alternatives to the hazard ratio in summarising efficacy in time to event studies: an example from influenza trials. Statistics in Medicine 2002; 21:3687-3700.
9. Glynn J, Buring JE. Recurrent events in cancer research. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 2001; 93:488-489.
10. Andersen PK, Gill RD. Cox's regression model for counting processes: a large sample study. Annals of Statistics 1982; 10:1100-1120.
11. Therneau TM, Grambsch PM. Modeling Survival Data: Extending the Cox Model. Springer: New York, 2000.
12. Kay R. An explanation of the hazard ratio. Pharmaceutical Statistics 2004; 3:295-297.
13. Atkinson AC. Plots, Transformations and Regression. Clarendon Press: Oxford, 1985.