Statistical methods for the analysis of relapse data in MS clinical trials

Journal of the Neurological Sciences

Volumn 285, Issue 1-2, 2009, Pages 206-211

  Wang, Y C ^a   Meyerson, L ^a   Tang, Y Q ^a   Qian, N ^b  

^a BIOGEN   (United States)

^b BOSTON UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

Author keywords

Count data; Cox proportional hazards model; Log link function; Negative binomial regression; Over dispersion; Poisson regression

Indexed keywords

NATALIZUMAB; PLACEBO;

ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; GENETIC HETEROGENEITY; HUMAN; MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS; POISSON DISTRIBUTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROPORTIONAL HAZARDS MODEL; RECURRENCE RISK; REMISSION; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS;

ADULT; ANTIBODIES, MONOCLONAL; BINOMIAL DISTRIBUTION; BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; COMPUTERS; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMMUNOLOGIC FACTORS; MALE; MODELS, STATISTICAL; MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS; POISSON DISTRIBUTION; PROPORTIONAL HAZARDS MODELS; RECURRENCE; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SOFTWARE; TIME FACTORS; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 69549120685     PISSN: 0022510X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jns.2009.07.017     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. D'Souza M., Kappos L., and Czaplinski A. Reconsidering clinical outcomes in multiple sclerosis: relapses, impairment, disability and beyond. J Neurol Sci 274 (2008) 76-79
2. Glynn R.J., and Buring J.E. Ways of measuring rates of recurrent events. BMJ 312 (1996) 364-366
3. Held U., Heigenhauser L., Shang C., Kappos L., and Polman C. Predictors of relapse rate in MS clinical trials. Neurology 65 11 (2005) 1769-1773
4. Gardner W., Mulvey E.P., and Shaw E.C. Regression analyses of counts and rates: Poisson, overdispersed Poisson, and negative binomial models. Psychol Bull 118 (1995) 392-404
5. McCullagh P., and Nelder J.A. Generalized linear models (1989), Chapman and Hall, London
6. Lindsey J.K. Counts and times to events. Stat Med 17 (1998) 1745-1751
7. Sormani M.P., Bruzzi P., Rovaris M., Barkhof F., Comi G., Miller D.H., et al. Modeling MRI enhancing lesion counts in multiple sclerosis using a negative binomial model: implications for clinical trials. J Neurol Sci 163 (1999) 74-80
8. Robertson M.C., Campbell A.J., and Herbison P. Statistical analysis of efficacy in falls prevention trials. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 60A (2005) 530-534
9. Lin D.Y., and Wei L.J. The robust inference for the proportional hazards model. J ASA 84 (1989) 1074-1078
10. Zeger S.L., Liang K.Y., and Albert P.S. Models for longitudinal data: a general estimating equation approach. Biometrics 44 (1988) 1049-1060
11. Cox D.R. Regression models and life tables. J R Stat Soc Series B 20 (1972) 187-220
12. Andersen P.K., and Gill R.D. Cox's regression model counting process: a large sample study. Ann Stat 10 (1982) 1100-1120
13. Wei L.J., Lin D.Y., and Weissfeld L. Regression analysis of multivariate incomplete failure time data by modeling marginal distribution. J ASA 84 (1989) 1065-1073
14. Prentice R.L., Williams B.J., and Peterson A.V. On the regression analysis of multivariate failure time data. Biometrika 68 (1981) 373-379
15. Kelly P.J., and Lim L.Y. Survival analysis for recurrent event data: an application to childhood infectious diseases. Stat Med 19 (2000) 13-33
16. Cleves M. Analysis of multiple failure-time data with Stata. Stata Tech Bull 49 (1999) 30-39
17. Lin D., Wei L., Yang I., and Ying Z. Semiparametric regression for the mean and rate functions of recurrent events. J R Stat Soc Series B 62 (2000) 711-730
18. Gail M., Wieand S., and Piantadosi S. Biased estimates of treatment effect in randomised experiments with nonlinear regressions and omitted covariates. Biometrika 71 (1984) 431-444
19. Metcalfe C., and Thompson S.G. Wei, Lin and Weissfeld's marginal analysis of multivariate failure time data: should it be applied to a recurrent events outcome?. Stat Methods Med Res 16 (2007) 103-122
20. Henderson R., and Oman P. Effect of frailty on marginal regression estimates in survival analysis. J R Stat Soc Series B 61 (1999) 367-379
21. Therneau T., and Grambsch P. Modeling survival data: extending the Cox model (2000), Springer-Verlag, NY
22. Metcalfe C., and Thompson S.G. The importance of varying the event generation process in simulation studies of statistical methods for recurrent events. Stat Med 25 (2006) 165-179
23. Jahn-Eimermacher A. Comparison of the Andersen-Gill model with Poisson and negative binomial regression on recurrent event data. Comput Stat Data Anal 52 (2008) 4989-4997
24. Ridout M., Hinde J., and Demetrio C.G.B. A score test for testing a zero-inflated Poisson regression model against zero-inflated negative binomial alternatives. Biometrics 57 (2001) 219-223
25. Lawless J.F. Negative binomial and mixed Poisson regression. Can J Stat 15 (1987) 209-225
26. Lawless JF. Regression methods for Poisson process data. J ASA 82 (1987) 808-815
27. Dean C.B., and Balshaw R. Efficiency lost by analyzing counts rather than event times in Poisson and overdispersed Poisson regression models. J ASA 92 (1997) 1387-1398
28. Wang Y.G., and Carey V. Working correlation structure misspecification, estimation and covariate design: implications for generalized estimating equations performance. Biometrika 90 (2003) 29-41
29. Sormani M.P., Rovaris M., Bagnato F., Molyneux P., Bruzzi P., Pozzilli C., et al. Sample size estimations for MRI-monitored trials of MS comparing new vs standard treatments. Neurology 57 10 (2001) 1883-1885
30. Sormani M.P., Miller D.H., Comi G., Barkhof F., Rovaris M., Bruzzi P., et al. Clinical trials of multiple sclerosis monitored with enhanced MRI: new sample size calculations based on large data sets. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 70 4 (2001) 494-499