A note on familywise error rate for a primary and secondary endpoint

Michael A. Proschan and Dean A. Follmann

Biometrics, 2023, vol. 79, issue 2, 1114-1118

Abstract: Hung et al. (2007) considered the problem of controlling the type I error rate for a primary and secondary endpoint in a clinical trial using a gatekeeping approach in which the secondary endpoint is tested only if the primary endpoint crosses its monitoring boundary. They considered a two‐look trial and showed by simulation that the naive method of testing the secondary endpoint at full level α at the time the primary endpoint reaches statistical significance does not control the familywise error rate at level α. Tamhane et al. (2010) derived analytic expressions for familywise error rate and power and confirmed the inflated error rate of the naive approach. Nonetheless, many people mistakenly believe that the closure principle can be used to prove that the naive procedure controls the familywise error rate. The purpose of this note is to explain in greater detail why there is a problem with the naive approach and show that the degree of alpha inflation can be as high as that of unadjusted monitoring of a single endpoint.

Date: 2023
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1111/biom.13668

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:bla:biomet:v:79:y:2023:i:2:p:1114-1118

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.blackwell ... bs.asp?ref=0006-341X

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Biometrics from The International Biometric Society
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().