Multiple Co-primary Endpoints: Medical and Statistical Solutions: A Report from the Multiple Endpoints Expert Team of the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America

There are quite a few disorders for which regulatory agencies have required a treatment to demonstrate a statistically significant effect on multiple endpoints, each at the one-sided 2.5% level, before accepting the treatment's efficacy for the disorders. Depending on the correlation among the endpoints, this requirement could lead to a substantial reduction in the study's power to conclude the efficacy of a treatment. To investigate the prevalence of this requirement and propose possible solutions, a multiple-disciplinary Multiple Endpoints Expert Team sponsored by Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America was formed in November 2003. The team recognized early that many researchers were not fully aware of the implications of requiring multiple co-primary endpoints. The team proposes possible solutions from both the medical and the statistical perspectives. The optimal solution is to reduce the number of multiple co-primary endpoints. If after careful considerations, multiple co-primary endpoints remain a scientific requirement, the team proposes statistical solutions and encourages that regulatory agencies be receptive to approaches that adopt modest upward adjustments of the nominal significance levels for testing individual endpoints. Finally, the team hopes that this report will draw more attention to the problem of multiple co-primary endpoints and stimulate further research.

[1]  G. C. Tiao,et al.  Bayesian inference in statistical analysis , 1973 .

[2]  Roger L. Berger,et al.  Multiparameter Hypothesis Testing and Acceptance Sampling , 1982 .

[3]  P. O'Brien Procedures for comparing samples with multiple endpoints. , 1984, Biometrics.

[4]  S. Snapinn,et al.  Evaluating the efficacy of a combination therapy. , 1987, Statistics in medicine.

[5]  E. Laska,et al.  Testing whether an identified treatment is best. , 1989, Biometrics.

[6]  G. Casella,et al.  Statistical Inference , 2003, Encyclopedia of Social Network Analysis and Mining.

[7]  G. Tucker,et al.  Clinical Measurement in Drug Evaluation , 1991 .

[8]  H. I. Patel Comparison of treatments in a combination therapy trial. , 1991, Journal of biopharmaceutical statistics.

[9]  George E. P. Box,et al.  Bayesian Inference in Statistical Analysis: Box/Bayesian , 1992 .

[10]  J. Hsu Multiple Comparisons: Theory and Methods , 1996 .

[11]  S. Sarkar,et al.  A note on assessing the superiority of a combination drug with a specific alternative. , 1996, Journal of biopharmaceutical statistics.

[12]  M F Huque,et al.  Some comments on frequently used multiple endpoint adjustment methods in clinical trials. , 1997, Statistics in medicine.

[13]  R. Kay Statistical Principles for Clinical Trials , 1998, The Journal of international medical research.

[14]  J. Caro,et al.  Migraine Therapy: Development and Testing of a Patient Preference Questionnaire , 1998, Headache.

[15]  Ferrari,et al.  Guidelines for Controlled Trials of Drugs in Migraine: Second Edition , 2000, Cephalalgia : an international journal of headache.

[16]  D. DeMets,et al.  Considerations in the evaluation of surrogate endpoints in clinical trials. summary of a National Institutes of Health workshop. , 2001, Controlled clinical trials.

[17]  B. Dahlof,et al.  Cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in the losartan intervention for end point reduction in hypertension study (LIFE): a randomised trial against atenolol☆ , 2002 .

[18]  Robert M Califf,et al.  Lessons learned from recent cardiovascular clinical trials: Part I. , 2002, Circulation.

[19]  P. Westfall,et al.  Gatekeeping strategies for clinical trials that do not require all primary effects to be significant , 2003, Statistics in medicine.

[20]  R. D'Agostino,et al.  Efficacy endpoint selection and multiplicity adjustment methods in clinical trials with inherent multiple endpoint issues , 2003, Statistics in medicine.

[21]  Gary G Koch,et al.  Type I Error and Power in Noninferiority/Equivalence Trials with Correlated Multiple Endpoints: An Example from Vaccine Development Trials , 2004, Journal of biopharmaceutical statistics.

[22]  Stacey L Knobler,et al.  The Critical Path to New Medical Products , 2005 .

[23]  H. Watanabe,et al.  Points to Consider on Multiplicity Issues in Clinical Trials , 2006 .

[24]  Christy Chuang-Stein,et al.  Challenge of multiple co‐primary endpoints: a new approach , 2007, Statistics in medicine.