Testing for qualitative interactions between stages in an adaptive study

Statistics in Medicine

Volumn 29, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 210-218

  Parker, Robert A ^a  

^a Truth Ltd   (United States)

Author keywords

Heterogeneity; Minimum detectable effect; Quantitative interactions; Subgroup analysis

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CALCULATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; RISK BENEFIT ANALYSIS; SIMULATION; THEORETICAL SAMPLE;

ALGORITHMS; BIAS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); COMPUTER SIMULATION; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; EPIDEMIOLOGIC RESEARCH DESIGN; HUMANS; MODELS, STATISTICAL; SAMPLE SIZE; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 74749102937     PISSN: 02776715     EISSN: 10970258     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sim.3757     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Peto R. Statistical aspects of cancer trials. In Treatment of Cancer, Halnan KE (ed.). Chapman & Hall: London, 1982; 867-871.
2. Gail M, Simon R. Testing for qualitative interactions between treatment effects and patient subsets. Biometrics 1985; 41:361-372.
3. Piantadosi S, Gail MH. A comparison of the power of two tests of qualitative interaction. Statistics in Medicine 1993; 12:1239-1248.
4. Zelterman D. On tests for qualitative interaction. Statistics and Probability Letters 1990; 10:59-63.
5. Silvapulle MJ. Tests against qualitative interaction: exact critical values and robust tests. Biometrics 2001; 57:1157-1165.
6. Li J, Chan ISF. Detecting qualitative interactions in clinical trials: an extension of range test. Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics 2006; 16:831-841.
7. Wiens BL, Heyse JF. Testing for interaction in studies of noninferiority. Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics 2003; 13:103-115.
8. Yan X. Test for qualitative interaction in equivalence trials when the number of centres is large. Statistics in Medicine 2004; 23:711-722.
9. Chen YHJ, Liu GHF. Testing for crossover of two hazard functions using Gail and Simon's method. Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics 2006; 16:313-326.
10. Pan G, Wolfe DA. Test for qualitative interaction of clinical significance. Statistics in Medicine 1997; 16:1645-1652.
11. Juhn P, Phillips A, Buto K. Balancing modern medical benefits and risks. Health Affairs 2007; 26:647-652.
12. Food and Drug Administration (2002). The FDA's drug review process: ensuring drugs are safe and effective. FDA Consumer Magazine 36(4). Available online with revisions at http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/ ResourcesForYou/Consumers/ucm143534.htm, downloaded on July 28, 2009.
13. Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use. Reflection paper on methodological issues in confirmatory clinical trials planned with an adaptive design. Document Reference: CHMP/EWP/2459/02, European Medicines Agency: London, 2007.
14. Gallo P, Chuang-Stein C. What should be the role of homogeneity testing in adaptive trials? Pharmaceutical Statistics 2009; 8:1-4. DOI: 10.1002/pst.342.
15. Friede T, Henderson R. Exploring changes in treatment effects across design stages in adaptive trials. Pharmaceutical Statistics 2009; 8:62-72. DOI: 10.1002/pst.332.
16. Azzalini A, Cox DR. Two new tests associated with analysis of variance. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B 1984; 46:335-343.
17. Bauer P, Köhne K. Evaluation of experiments with adaptive interim analyses. Biometrics 1994; 23:3-15.
18. Proschan MA, Hunsberger SA. Designed extension of studies based on conditional power. Biometrics 1995; 51:1315-1324.
19. Müller H-H, Schäfer H. Adaptive group sequential designs for clinical trials: combining the advantages of adaptive and of classical group sequential approaches. Biometrics 2001; 57:886-891.