Compatible simultaneous lower confidence bounds for the Holm procedure and other Bonferroni-based closed tests

Statistics in Medicine

Volumn 27, Issue 24, 2008, Pages 4914-4927

  Strassburger, Klaus ^a   Bretz, Frank ^b  

^a HEINRICH HEINE UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^b NOVARTIS PHARMA AG   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Closed test procedure; Holm procedure; Partitioning principle; Weighted Bonferroni test

Indexed keywords

ANALYTICAL ERROR; ARTICLE; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; NULL HYPOTHESIS; PROBABILITY; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; ALGORITHM; BIOMETRY; METHODOLOGY;

ALGORITHMS; BIOMETRY; CONFIDENCE INTERVALS; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL;

EID: 54549122408     PISSN: 02776715     EISSN: 10970258     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sim.3338     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Hochberg Y, Tamhane AC. Multiple Comparison Procedures. Wiley: New York, 1987.
2. Hsu JC. Multiple Comparisons: Theory and Methods. Chapman & Hall: London, 1996.
3. Holm S. A simple sequentially rejective multiple test procedure. Scandinavian Journal of Statistics 1979; 6:65-70.
4. Marcus R, Peritz E, Gabriel KR. On closed testing procedure with special reference to ordered analysis of variance. Biometrika 1976; 63:655-660.
5. Finner H. Testing multiple hypotheses: general theory, specific problems, and relationships to other multiple decision procedures. Habilitationsschrift. Universität Trier, FB IV Mathematik/ Statistik, 1994.
6. Hayter AJ, Hsu JC. On the relationship between stepwise decision procedures and confidence sets. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1994; 89:128-136.
7. Westfall PH, Tobias R. Closed multiple testing procedures and PROC MULTTEST. Observations 1999; 23. Available from: http://support.sas.com/documentation/perodicals/obs/obswww23/.
8. Anonymous. Pairwise comparisons in SAS and SPSS. Available from: http://www.uky.edu/ComputingCenter/SSTARS/MultipleComparisons3.htm.
9. Bauer P, Röhmel J, Maurer W, Hothorn L. Testing strategies in multi-dose experiments including active control. Statistics in Medicine 1998; 17:2133-2146.
10. Westfall PH, Krishen A. Optimally weighted, fixed sequence, and gatekeeping multiple testing procedures. Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference 2001; 99:25-40.
11. Dmitrienko A, Offen WW, Westfall PH. Gatekeeping strategies for clinical trials that do not require all primary effects to be significant. Statistics in Medicine 2003; 22:2387-2400.
12. Chen X, Luo X, Caprizzi T. The application of enhanced gatekeeping strategies. Statistics in Medicine 2005; 24:1385-1397.
13. Maurer W, Hothorn L, Lehmacher W. Multiple comparisons in drug clinical trials and preclinical assays: a-priori ordered hypotheses. In Biometrie in der Chemisch-pharmazeutischen Industrie, Vollmar J (ed.). Fischer Verlag: Stuttgart, 1995; 3-18.
14. Wiens BL. A fixed sequence Bonferroni procedure for testing multiple endpoints. Pharmaceutical Statistics 2003; 2:211-215.
15. Wiens BL, Dmitrienko A. The fallback procedure for evaluating a single family of hypotheses. Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics 2005; 15:929-942.
16. Finner H, Strassburger K. The partitioning principle: a powerful tool in multiple decision theory. The Annals of Statistics 2002; 30:1194-1213.
17. Ludbrook J. Multiple inferences using confidence intervals. Clinical and Experimental Pharmacology and Physiology 2000; 27:212-215.
18. Serlin RC. Confidence intervals and the scientific method: a case for Holm on the range. Journal of Experimental Education 1993; 61:350-360.
19. Hommel G, Bretz F, Maurer W. Powerful short-cuts for multiple testing procedures with special reference to gatekeeping strategies. Statistics in Medicine 2007; 26(22):4063-4073.
20. Hsu JC, Berger RL. Stepwise confidence intervals without multiplicity adjustment for dose-response and toxicity studies. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1999; 94:468-482.
21. Bofinger E. Step down procedures for comparison with a control. Australian Journal of Statistics 1987; 29: 348-364.
22. Dunnett CW, Tamhane AC. Step-down multiple test for comparing treatments with a control in unbalanced one-way layouts. Statistics in Medicine 1991; 10:939-947.
23. Dunnett CW, Tamhane AC. Step-up multiple test of parameters with unequally correlated estimates. Biometrics 1995; 51:217-227.
24. Finner H, Strassburger K. Step-up related simultaneous confidence intervals for MCC and MCB. Biometrical Journal 2007; 49:40-51.
25. Finner H, Strassburger K. On δ-equivalence with the best in k-sample models. Journal of the American Statistical Association 2006; 101:737-746.
26. FDA Guidance for Industry. Clinical studies section of labeling for prescription drugs and biologics. Available from: www.fda.gov/cder/ guidance/5534fnl.htm.
27. Guidance for Industry. Clinical data needed to support the licensure of seasonal inactivated influenza vaccines. Available from: www.fda.gov/ cber/gdlns/trifluvac.htm.
28. Guilbaud O. Simultaneous confidence regions corresponding to Holm's step-down multiple testing procedure. Presentation at the 5th International Conference on Multiple Comparison Procedures, Vienna, July 08-11, 2007. Available from: www.mcp-conference.org/2007/ presentations/Guilbaud Olivier.ppt.
29. Stefansson G, Kim WC, Hsu JC. On confidence sets in multiple comparisons. In Statistical Decision Theory and Related Topics, vol. IV, Gupta SS, Berger JO (eds). Academic Press: New York, 1988; 89-104.
30. Miwa T, Hayter AJ. Combining the advantages of one-sided and two-sided test procedures for comparing several treatment effects. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1994; 94:302-307.
31. Hayter AJ, Miwa T, Liu W. Combining the advantages of one-sided and two-sided procedures for comparing several treatments with a control. Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference 2000; 86:81-99.