Multiple Co-primary Endpoints: Medical and Statistical Solutions: A Report from the Multiple Endpoints Expert Team of the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America
Tóm tắt
Từ khóa
Tài liệu tham khảo
Sankoh AJ, Huque MF, Dubey SD. Some comments on frequently used multiple endpoint adjustment methods in clinical trials. Stat Med. 1997;16:2529–2542.
ICH E9. Statistical Principles for Clinical Trials. Step 5 guidance document, 2000. Available at: http://www.ich.org. Accessed November 11, 2006.
CPMP/EWP/908/99. Points to consider on multiplicity issues in clinical trials (adopted September 2002). Available at: http://www.emea.cu.int/pdfs/human/ewp/090899en.pdf. Accessed November 11, 2006.
Berger RL, Multiparameter hypothesis testing and acceptance sampling. Technometrics. 1982; 24:295–300.
Laska KM, Meisner MJ. Testing whether the identified treatment is best. Biometrics. 1989;45: 1139–1151.
Eaton ML, Muirhead RJ. On a multiple endpoints problem. J Stat Plann Infer. In press.
Kong L, Kohberger RC, Koch GG. Type 1 error and power in noninferiority/equivalence trials with correlated multiple endpoints: an example from vaccine development trials, J Biopharm Stat. 2004;14:893–907.
ICH E14. The Clinical Evaluation of QT/QTc Interval Prolongation and Proarrhythmic Potential for Non-antiarrhythrnic Drugs. Step 3 guidance document. 2004, Available at: http://www.ich.org. Accessed November 11, 2006.
Leung HM. O’Neill RT. Statistical assessment of combination drugs—a regulatory view. In: Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the American Statistical Association; August 7, 1986; Chicago, IL; Biopharmaceutical Subsection: 33–36.
Temple RJ. A regulatory authorities opinion about surrogate endpoints. In: Nimmo WS, Tucker GT, eds. Clinical Measurement in Drug Evaluation. New York, NY: Wiley: 1995:322.
De Gruttola VG, Clax P, DeMets DL, et al. Considerations in the evaluation of surrogate endpoinls in clinical trials: summary of a National Institutes of Health Workshop. Control Clin Trials. 2001;22: 485–502.
O’Brien PC Procedures for comparing samples with multiple endpoints. Biometrics. 1984;40: 1079–1087.
Caro G. Caro J. O’Brien JA, Anton S, Jackson J. Migraine therapy: development and testing of a patient preference questionnaire. Headache, 1998; 38:602–607.
International Headache Society Clinical Trials Subcommittee. Guidelines for controlled trials of drugs in migraine: second edition. Cephalalgia. 2000;20:765–786.
DeMets DL, Califf RM. Lessons learned from recent cardiovascular clinical trials: part I. Circulations. 2002;106:746–751.
Dahlof B, Devercux RB, Kjeldsen SE, et al. Cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in the Losartan Intervention for Endpoint reduction in hypertension study (LIEE): a randomised trial against atenolol. Lancet. 2002;359:995–1003.
Sankoh AJ. D’Agostino RB, Huque MF, Efficacy endpoinl selection and multiplicity adjustment methods in clinical trials with inherent multiple endpoinl issues. Stat Med. 2003;22:3133–3150.
Offen WW, Helterbrand JD. Multiple comparison adjustments when two or more co-primary endpoints must all be statistically significant. In: Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the American Statistical Association: August 7, 1986; Chicago, IL; Biopharmaceutical Subsection.
Snapinn SM, Sarkar SK. Assessing the superiority of a combination drug with a specific alternative. J Biopharm Stat. 1996;6:241–251.
Chuang-Stein C. Stryszak P, Dmilrienko A, Offen W. Challenge of multiple co-primary endpoinls; new approache. Stat Med. In press.
Casella G, Berger RL. Statistical Inference. 2nd ed. St. Paul, MN: Brooks/Cole: 2001.
Box GEP, Tiao GC. Bayesian inference in Statistical Analysts. New York: Wiley Classics Library; 1992. [Original work published 1973.]
Grieve A, Muirhead RJ, A Bayesian approach to the multiple endpoints problem. Unpublished manuscript.
food and Drug Administration. The Critical Path to New Medical Products. March 2004. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/oc/inilialives/crilicalpalh/whitepaper.hlml. Accessed November 11, 2006.