For the analysis of dose-response relationship under the assumption of ordered alternatives several global trend tests are available. Furthermore, there are multiple test procedures which can identify doses as effective or even as minimally effective. In this paper it is shown that the principles of multiple comparisons and interim analyses can be combined inflexible and adaptive strategies for dose-response analyses; these procedures control the experimentwise error rate.
Note for guidance on dose-response information to support drug registration.International Conference for Harmonization. Topic E, CPMP/ICH/378/95.
2.
TamhaneACHochbergYDunnettCWMultiple test procedures for dose finding. Biometrics.1996;52:21–37.
3.
PhillipsA.Sample size estimation when comparing more than two treatment groups. Drug Inf J.1998;32:193–200.
4.
PhillipsA.A review of the performance of tests used to establish whether there is a drug effect in dose-response studies. Drug Inf J.1998;32:683–692.
5.
HothornLLehmacherW.A simple testing procedure “control versus k treatments” for one-sided ordered alternatives, with application in toxicology. Biom J.1991;33:179–189.
6.
KieserMLehmacherW.Multiple testing in clinical trials with interim analyses and a-priori ordered hypotheses. (Multiples Testen bei klinischen Prüfungen mit Zwischenauswertungen und a priori geordneten Hypothesen.) In: TrampischHJLangeS. (eds.): Medical Research—Medical Practice. (Medizinische Forschung—Ärztliches Handeln.) Proceedings, MMV Medizin VerlagMünchen. 1995; 162–165.
7.
MaurerWHothornLLehmacherW.Multiple comparisons in drug clinical trials and preclinical assays: a priori ordered hypotheses. In: VollmarJ (ed.). Biometrics in the Pharmaceutical Industry. (Biometrie in der chemisch-pharmazeutischen Industrie.)Stuttgart: Fischer: 1995;6:3–21.
8.
BauerP.A note on multiple testing procedures in dose finding. Biometrics.1997;53:1125–1128.
9.
MarcusRPeritzEGabrielKROn closed testing procedures with special reference to ordered analysis of variance. Biometrika.1976;63:655–660.
10.
RomDMCostelloRJConnellLTOn closed test procedures for dose-response analysis. Stat Med.1994;13:1583–1596.
11.
BuddeMBauerP.Multiple test procedures in clinical dose finding studies. J Am Stat Assoc.1989;84: 792–796.
12.
DeMetsDLWareJHGroup sequential methods in clinical trials with a one-sided hypothesis. Biometrika.1980;67:651–660.
13.
BauerPBuddeM.Multiple testing for detecting efficient dose steps. Biom J.1994;36:3–15.
14.
BauerPKönneK.Evaluation of experiments with adaptive interim analyses. Biometrics.1994;50: 1029–1041.
15.
ProschanMAHunsbergerSADesigned extension of studies based on conditional power. Biometrics.1995;51:1315–1324.
16.
LehmacherWWassmerG.Adaptive sample size calculation in group sequential trials. Biometrics.1999;55:1286–1290.
17.
BauerPRöhmelJ.An adaptive method for establishing a dose response relationship. Stat Med.1995;14:1595–1607.
18.
KieserMBauerPLehmacherW.Inference on multiple endpoints in clinical trials with adaptive interim analyses. Biom 7. 1999;41:261–277.
19.
LaakmannDSchüleCBaghaiTKieserM.St. John's Wort in mild to moderate depression: the relevance of hyperforin for the clinical efficacy. Pharmacopsychiatry.1998;31:54–59.
20.
HamiltonM.A rating scale for depression. J Neurol Neurosurgery Psychiatry.1960;23:56–62.
21.
JonckheereARA distribution-free k sample test against ordered alternatives. Biometrika.1954;41: 133–145.
