Literature DB >> 29265179

Detecting treatment differences in group sequential longitudinal studies with covariate adjustment.

Neal O Jeffries1, James F Troendle1, Nancy L Geller1.   

Abstract

In longitudinal studies comparing two treatments over a series of common follow-up measurements, there may be interest in determining if there is a treatment difference at any follow-up period when there may be a non-monotone treatment effect over time. To evaluate this question, Jeffries and Geller (2015) examined a number of clinical trial designs that allowed adaptive choice of the follow-up time exhibiting the greatest evidence of treatment difference in a group sequential testing setting with Gaussian data. The methods are applicable when a few measurements were taken at prespecified follow-up periods. Here, we test the intersection null hypothesis of no difference at any follow-up time versus the alternative that there is a difference for at least one follow-up time. Results of Jeffries and Geller (2015) are extended by considering a broader range of modeled data and the inclusion of covariates using generalized estimating equations. Testing procedures are developed to determine a set of follow-up times that exhibit a treatment difference that accounts for multiplicity in follow-up times and interim analyses. Published 2017. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Generalized estimating equations; Generalized linear models; Group sequential design; Longitudinal analysis

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29265179      PMCID: PMC7515605          DOI: 10.1111/biom.12837

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biometrics        ISSN: 0006-341X            Impact factor:   2.571


  6 in total

1.  Sequential monitoring for comparison of changes in a response variable in clinical studies.

Authors:  M C Wu; K K Lan
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1992-09       Impact factor: 2.571

2.  Group sequential clinical trials for longitudinal data with analyses using summary statistics.

Authors:  John M Kittelson; Katrina Sharples; Scott S Emerson
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2005-08-30       Impact factor: 2.373

3.  Longitudinal clinical trials with adaptive choice of follow-up time.

Authors:  Neal Jeffries; Nancy L Geller
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2015-03-27       Impact factor: 2.571

4.  Effect of enalapril on survival in patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fractions and congestive heart failure.

Authors:  Salim Yusuf; Bertram Pitt; Clarence E Davis; William B Hood; Jay N Cohn
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1991-08-01       Impact factor: 91.245

5.  Quality of life among 5,025 patients with left ventricular dysfunction randomized between placebo and enalapril: the Studies of Left Ventricular Dysfunction. The SOLVD Investigators.

Authors:  W J Rogers; D E Johnstone; S Yusuf; D H Weiner; P Gallagher; V A Bittner; S Ahn; E Schron; S A Shumaker; L T Sheffield
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  1994-02       Impact factor: 24.094

6.  Repeated significance tests for clinical trials with a fixed number of patients and variable follow-up.

Authors:  P Armitage; I M Stratton; H V Worthington
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1985-06       Impact factor: 2.571

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.