Multiplicity considerations in clinical trials

New England Journal of Medicine

Volumn 378, Issue 22, 2018, Pages 2115-2122

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

^a Mediana Inc   (United States)

^b BOSTON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); DOSE CALCULATION; EXPLORATORY RESEARCH; HEALTH CARE PLANNING; HUMAN; ONCOLOGICAL PROCEDURE; OVERALL SURVIVAL; PHASE 2 CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); PHASE 3 CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGRESSION FREE SURVIVAL; REVIEW; THERAPY EFFECT; TREATMENT OUTCOME; CAUSALITY; METHODOLOGY; PROCEDURES; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICS;

CAUSALITY; CLINICAL TRIALS, PHASE III AS TOPIC; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; HUMANS; RESEARCH DESIGN; STATISTICS AS TOPIC;

EID: 85048054697     PISSN: 00284793     EISSN: 15334406     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1056/NEJMra1709701     Document Type: Review

References (33)

1. Bauer P. Multiple testing in clinical trials. Stat Med 1991; 10: 871-89.
2. D'Agostino RB, Heeren TC. Multiple comparisons in over-the-counter drug clinical trials with both positive and placebo controls. Stat Med 1991; 10: 1-6.
3. D'Agostino RB, Massaro J, Kwan H, Cabral H. Strategies for dealing with multiple treatment comparisons in confirmatory clinical trials. Drug Inf J 1993; 27: 625-41.
4. Sankoh AJ, Huque MF, Dubey SD. Some comments on frequently used multiple endpoint adjustment methods in clinical trials. Stat Med 1997; 16: 2529-42.
5. Dmitrienko A, D'Agostino RB Sr, Huque MF. Key multiplicity issues in clinical drug development. Stat Med 2013; 32: 1079-111.
6. Huque MF, Dmitrienko A, D'Agostino RB. Multiplicity issues in clinical trials with multiple objectives. Stat Biopharm Res 2013; 5: 321-37.
7. Food and Drug Administration. Multiple endpoints in clinical trials: Guidance for industry. January 2017 (https://www .fda .gov/downloads/drugs/guidancecompliance regulatoryinformation/guidances/ucm536750 .pdf).
8. European Medicines Agency. Points to consider on multiplicity issues in clinical trials. September 2002 (http://www .ema .europa .eu/docs/en-GB/document-library/Scientific-guideline/2009/09/WC500003640 .pdf).
9. European Medicines Agency. Guideline on multiplicity issues in clinical trials. December 2016 (http://www .ema .europa .eu/docs/en-GB/document-library/Scientific -guideline/2017/03/WC500224998 .pdf).
10. Dmitrienko A, D'Agostino R Sr. Traditional multiplicity adjustment methods in clinical trials. Stat Med 2013; 32: 5172-218.
11. Offen W, Chuang-Stein C, Dmitrienko A, et al. Multiple co-primary endpoints: Medical and statistical solutions: A report from the multiple endpoints expert team of the Pharmaceutical Research and Man- ufacturers of America. Drug Inf J 2007; 41: 31-46.
12. Chuang-Stein C, Dmitrienko A, Offen W. Discussion of "Some controversial multiple testing problems in regulatory applications." J Biopharm Stat 2009; 19: 14-21.
13. Bretz F, Pinheiro JC, Branson M. Combining multiple comparisons and modeling techniques in dose-response studies. Biometrics 2005; 61: 738-48.
14. Mehrotra DV, Heyse JF. Use of the false discovery rate for evaluating clinical safety data. Stat Methods Med Res 2004; 13: 227-38.
15. Dmitrienko A, Bretz F, Westfall PH, et al. Multiple testing methodology. In: Dmitrienko A, Tamhane AC, Bretz F, eds. Multiple testing problems in pharmaceutical statistics. New York: Chapman and Hall/CRC Press, 2009: 35-98.
16. D'Agostino RB Sr. Controlling alpha in a clinical trial: The case for secondary endpoints. Stat Med 2000; 19: 763-6.
17. Huque MF, Rohmel J. Multiplicity problems in clinical trials: A regulatory perspective. In: Dmitrienko A, Tamhane AC, Bretz F, eds. Multiple testing problems in pharmaceutical statistics. New York: Chapman & Hall/CRC Press, 2010: 1-34.
18. Dmitrienko A, Tamhane AC. Gatekeeping procedures in clinical trials. In: Dmitrienko A, Tamhane AC, Bretz F, eds. Multiple testing problems in pharmaceutical statistics. New York: Chapman and Hall/CRC Press, 2009: 165-91.
19. Sankoh AJ, Li H, D'Agostino RB Sr. Use of composite endpoints in clinical trials. Stat Med 2014; 33: 4709-14.
20. Ryan CJ, Smith MR, de Bono JS, et al. Abiraterone in metastatic prostate cancer without previous chemotherapy. N Engl J Med 2013; 368: 138-48.
21. Beer TM, Armstrong AJ, Rathkopf DE, et al. Enzalutamide in metastatic prostate cancer before chemotherapy. N Engl J Med 2014; 371: 424-33.
22. Dmitrienko A, Pulkstenis E, eds. Clinical trial optimization using R. New York: Chapman and Hall/CRC Press, 2017.
23. Meltzer HY, Cucchiaro J, Silva R, et al. Lurasidone in the treatment of schizophrenia: A randomized, double-blind, placebo- And olanzapine-controlled study. Am J Psychiatry 2011; 168: 957-67.
24. Nasrallah HA, Silva R, Phillips D, et al. Lurasidone for the treatment of acutely psychotic patients with schizophrenia: A 6-week, randomized, placebo-controlled study. J Psychiatr Res 2013; 47: 670-7.
25. Brechenmacher T, Xu J, Dmitrienko A, Tamhane AC. A mixture gatekeeping procedure based on the Hommel test for clinical trial applications. J Biopharm Stat 2011; 21: 748-67.
26. Dmitrienko A, Tamhane AC. Mixtures of multiple testing procedures for gatekeeping applications in clinical trials. Stat Med 2011; 30: 1473-88.
27. Dmitrienko A, Tamhane AC. General theory of mixture procedures for gatekeeping. Biom J 2013; 55: 402-19.
28. Dahlof B, Devereux RB, Kjeldsen SE, et al. Cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in the Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction in hypertension study (LIFE): A randomised trial against atenolol. Lancet 2002; 359: 995-1003.
29. Huque MF, Alosh M, Bhore R. Addressing multiplicity issues of a composite endpoint and its components in clinical trials. J Biopharm Stat 2011; 21: 610-34.
30. Lipkovich I, Dmitrienko A, D'Agostino RB Sr. Tutorial in biostatistics: Data-driven subgroup identification and analysis in clinical trials. Stat Med 2017; 36: 136-96.
31. Millen BA, Dmitrienko A, Ruberg S, Shen L. A statistical framework for decision making in confirmatory multipopulation tailoring clinical trials. Drug Inf J 2012; 46: 647-56.
32. Cappuzzo F, Ciuleanu T, Stelmakh L, et al. SATURN: A double-blind, randomized, phase III study of maintenance erlotinib versus placebo following nonprogression with first-line platinum-based chemotherapy in patients with advanced NSCLC. J Clin Oncol 2009; 27: 8001. abstract.
33. Cohen AT, Harrington RA, Goldhaber SZ, et al. Extended thromboprophylaxis with betrixaban in acutely ill medical patients. N Engl J Med 2016; 375: 534-44.