Traditional multiplicity adjustment methods in clinical trials

Statistics in Medicine

Volumn 32, Issue 29, 2013, Pages 5172-5218

  Dmitrienko, Alex ^a   D'Agostino, Ralph ^b,c  

^a IQVIA   (United States)

^b BOSTON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c HARVARD CLINICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

Clinical trials; Multiple testing procedures; Multiplicity adjustments; Multiplicity problems; Type I error rate

Indexed keywords

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ANALYTIC METHOD; ARTICLE; BONFERRONI PROCEDURE; CLINICAL RESEARCH; HOCHBERG PROCEDURE; HOLM PROCEDURE; HOMMEL PROCEDURE; HYPOTHESIS; MATHEMATICAL ANALYSIS; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; METHODOLOGY; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PROBABILITY; PROBLEM SOLVING; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL CONCEPTS; STATISTICAL DISTRIBUTION;

CLINICAL TRIALS; MULTIPLE TESTING PROCEDURES; MULTIPLICITY ADJUSTMENTS; MULTIPLICITY PROBLEMS; TYPE I ERROR RATE;

ALGORITHMS; CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; CONFIDENCE INTERVALS; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; HUMANS; SAMPLE SIZE; SOFTWARE;

EID: 84887241280     PISSN: 02776715     EISSN: 10970258     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sim.5990     Document Type: Article

References (62)

1. Hochberg Y, Tamhane AC. Multiple Comparison Procedures. Wiley: New York, 1987.
2. Hsu JC. Multiple Comparisons: Theory and Methods. Chapman and Hall: London, 1996.
3. Dmitrienko A, Bretz F, Westfall PH, Troendle J, Wiens BL, Tamhane AC, Hsu JC. Multiple testing methodology. In Multiple Testing Problems in Pharmaceutical Statistics, Dmitrienko A, Tamhane AC, Bretz F (eds). Chapman and Hall/CRC Press: New York, 2009; 35-98.
4. Sankoh AJ, D'Agostino RB, Huque MF. Efficacy endpoint selection and multiplicity adjustment methods in clinical trials with inherent multiple endpoint issues. Statistics in Medicine 2003; 22:3133-3150.
5. Huque M, Dmitrienko A, D'Agostino RB. Multiplicity issues in clinical trials with multiple objectives. Statistics in Biopharmaceutical Research 2013; 32:1079-1111.
6. Dmitrienko A, Tamhane AC. Gatekeeping procedures in clinical trials. In Multiple Testing Problems in Pharmaceutical Statistics, Dmitrienko A, Tamhane AC, Bretz F (eds). Chapman and Hall/CRC Press: New York, 2009; 131-164.
7. Dmitrienko A, D'Agostino RB, Huque M. Key multiplicity issues in clinical drug development. Statistics in Medicine 2013; 32:1079-1111.
8. Alosh M, Bretz F, Huque M. Recent advances in addressing multiplicity issues in clinical trials. Statistics in Medicine 2014. In press.
9. Goeman JJ, Solari A. Tutorial in biostatistics: multiple hypothesis testing in genomics. Statistics in Medicine 2014. In press.
10. Roy SN. On a heuristic method for test construction and its use in multivariate analysis. The Annals of Statistics 1953; 24:220-238.
11. Laska EM, Meisner MJ. Testing whether an identified treatment is best. Biometrics 1989; 45:1139-1151.
12. Offen W, Chuang-Stein C, Dmitrienko A, Littman G, Maca J, Meyerson L, Muirhead R, Stryszak P, Boddy A, Chen K, Copley-Merriman K, Dere W, Givens S, Hall D, Henry D, Jackson JD, Krishen A, Liu T, Ryder S, Sankoh AJ, Wang J, Yeh CH. Multiple co-primary endpoints: medical and statistical solutions. A report from the Multiple Endpoints Expert Team of the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America. Drug Information Journal 2007; 41:31-46.
13. Chuang-Stein C, Dmitrienko A, Offen W. Discussion of 'Some controversial multiple testing problems in regulatory applications' by H.M. James Hung and Sue-Jane Wang. Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics 2009; 19:14-21.
14. Kordzakhia G, Siddiqui O, Huque MF. Method of balanced adjustment in testing co-primary endpoints. Statistics in Medicine 2010; 29:2055-2066.
15. Committee for Proprietary Medicinal Products. Points to consider on multiplicity issues in clinical trials, 2002.
16. Marcus R, Peritz E, Gabriel KR. On closed testing procedure with special reference to ordered analysis of variance. Biometrika 1976; 63:655-660.
17. Stefansson G, Kim WC, Hsu JC. On confidence sets in multiple comparisons. In Statistical Decision Theory and Related Topics IV, Gupta SS, Berger JO (eds). Academic Press, New York, 1988; 89-104.
18. Finner H, Strassburger K. The partitioning principle: a powerful tool in multiple decision theory. The Annals of Statistics 2002; 30:1194-1213.
19. Goeman JJ, Solari A. The sequential rejection principle of familywise error control. The Annals of Statistics 2010; 38:3782-3810.
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. Liu Y, Hsu JC. Testing for efficacy in primary and secondary endpoints by partitioning decision paths. Journal of the American Statistical Association 2009; 104:1661-1670.
22. Holm S. A simple sequentially rejective multiple test procedure. Scandinavian Journal of Statistics 1979; 6:65-70.
23. Grechanovsky E, Hochberg Y. Closed procedures are better and often admit a shortcut. Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference 1999; 76:79-91.
24. Hochberg Y. A sharper Bonferroni procedure for multiple significance testing. Biometrika 1988; 75:800-802.
25. Huque MF, Sankoh AJ. A reviewer's perspective on multiple endpoint issues in clinical trials. Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics 1997; 7:545-564.
26. Westfall PH, Young SS. Resampling-based Multiple Testing: Examples and Methods for P-Value Adjustment. John Wiley: New York, 1993.
27. Bretz F, Maurer W, Brannath W, Posch M. A graphical approach to sequentially rejective multiple test procedures. Statistics in Medicine 2009; 28:586-604.
28. Burman CF, Sonesson C, Guilbaud O. A recycling framework for the construction of Bonferroni-based multiple tests. Statistics in Medicine 2009; 28:739-761.
29. Millen B, Dmitrienko A. Chain procedures: a class of flexible closed testing procedures with clinical trial applications. Statistics in Biopharmaceutical Research 2011; 3:14-30.
30. Wiens B. A fixed-sequence Bonferroni procedure for testing multiple endpoints. Pharmaceutical Statistics 2003; 2:211-215.
31. Wiens B, Dmitrienko A. The fallback procedure for evaluating a single family of hypotheses. Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics 2005; 15:929-942.
32. Wiens B, Dmitrienko A, Marchenko O. Selection of hypothesis weights and ordering when testing multiple hypotheses in clinical trials. Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics 2013. In press.
33. Dmitrienko A, Tamhane AC, Wiens B. General multistage gatekeeping procedures. Biometrical Journal 2008; 50:667-677.
34. Šidák Z. Rectangular confidence regions for the means of multivariate normal distributions. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1967; 62:626-633.
35. Simes RJ. An improved Bonferroni procedure for multiple tests of significance. Biometrika 1986; 63:655-660.
36. Hommel G. A stagewise rejective multiple test procedure based on a modified Bonferroni test. Biometrika 1988; 75:383-386.
37. Huque MF, Alosh M, Bhore R. Addressing multiplicity issues of a composite endpoint and its components in clinical trials. Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics 2011; 21:610-634.
38. Sarkar S, Chang CK. Simes' method for multiple hypothesis testing with positively dependent test statistics. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1997; 92:1601-1608.
39. Sarkar SK. Some probability inequalities for censored MTP2 random variables: a proof of the Simes conjecture. The Annals of Statistics 1998; 26:494-504.
40. Sarkar SK. On the Simes inequality and its generalization. In Beyond Parametrics in Interdisciplinary Research: Festschrift in Honor of Professor Pranab K. Sen, Balakrishnan N, Pena EA, Silvapulle MJ (eds). Institute of Mathematical Statistics: Beachwood, Ohio, 2008; 231-242.
41. Hung J, Wang SJ. Some controversial multiple testing problems in regulatory applications. Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics 2009; 19:1-11.
42. Fisher LD, Moyé LA. Carvedilol and the food and drug administration approval process: an introduction. Controlled Clinical Trials 1999; 20:1-15.
43. Dmitrienko A, Millen B, Brechenmacher T, Paux G. Development of gatekeeping strategies in confirmatory clinical trials. Biometrical Journal 2011; 53:875-893.
44. D'Agostino R, Massaro J, Kwan H, Cabral H. Strategies for dealing with multiple treatment comparisons in confirmatory clinical trials. Drug Information Journal 1993; 27:625-641.
45. Li D, Mehrotra DV. An efficient method for accommodating potentially underpowered primary endpoints. Statistics in Medicine 2008; 27:5377-5391.
46. Alosh M, Huque MF. A flexible strategy for testing subgroups and overall population. Statistics in Medicine 2009; 28:3-23.
47. Alosh M, Huque MF. A consistency-adjusted alpha-adaptive strategy for sequential testing. Statistics in Medicine 2010; 29:1559-1571.
48. Zhao YD, Dmitrienko A, Tamura R. On optimal designs of clinical trials with a sensitive subgroup. Statistics in Biopharmaceutical Research 2010; 2:72-83.
49. Li H, Sankoh AJ, D'Agostino RB. Extension of adaptive alpha allocation methods for strong control of the family-wise error rate. Statistics in Medicine 2013; 32:181-195.
50. Dunnett CW. A multiple comparison procedure for comparing several treatments with a control. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1955; 50:1096-1121.
51. Bretz F, Hothorn T, Westfall P. Multiple Comparisons Using R. Chapman and Hall/CRC Press: New York, 2010.
52. Naik UD. Some selection rules for comparing p processes with a standard. Communications in Statistics. Series A 1975; 4:519-535.
53. Dunnett CW, Tamhane AC. Step-down multiple tests for comparing treatments with acontrol in unbalanced one-way layouts. Statistics in Medicine 1991; 10:939-947.
54. Dunnett CW, Tamhane AC. A step-up multiple test procedure. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1992; 87:162-170.
55. Kwong KS, Liu W. Calculation of critical values for Dunnett and Tamhane's step-up multiple test procedure. Statistics and Probability Letters 2000; 49:411-416.
56. Guilbaud O. Simultaneous confidence regions corresponding to Holm's stepdown procedure and other closed-testing procedures. Biometrical Journal 2008; 50:678-692.
57. Strassburger K, Bretz F. Compatible simultaneous lower confidence bounds for the Holm procedure and other Bonferroni based closed tests. Statistics in Medicine 2008; 27:4914-4927.
58. Guilbaud O. Simultaneous confidence regions for closed tests, including Holm, Hochberg and Hommel related procedures. Biometrical Journal 2012; 54:317-342.
59. Guilbaud O, Karlsson P. Confidence regions for Bonferroni-based closed tests extended to more general closed tests. Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics 2011; 21:682-707.
60. Bauer P. On the assessment of the performance of multiple test procedures. Biometrical Journal 1987; 29:895-906.
61. Bretz F, Maurer W, Hommel G. Test and power considerations for multiple endpoint analyses using sequentially rejective graphical procedures. Statistics in Medicine 2011; 30:1489-1501.
62. Brechenmacher T, Xu J, Dmitrienko A, Tamhane AC. A mixture gatekeeping procedure based on the Hommel test for clinical trial applications. Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics 2011; 21:748-767.