Skip to main content

Data Analysis of Dose-Ranging Trials for Binary Outcomes

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
  • 1081 Accesses

Part of the book series: ICSA Book Series in Statistics ((ICSABSS))

Abstract

Continuing the data analysis for dose-ranging clinical trials from Chap. 9 for continuous outcomes, we illustrate the analysis for binary data in this chapter. We will use the same data from Chap. 9, but dichotomize the continuous response data into binary data simply for the pedagogical purpose of continuing from the previous chapter and illustrating the methods on analyzing dose-ranging clinical trial with binary data.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Agresti, A. (2012). Categorical data analysis (3rd ed.). New York: Wiley.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Armitage, P. (1955). Tests for linear trends in proportions and frequencies. Biometrics, 11(3), 375–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bauer, P., & Budde, M. (1994). Multiple testing for detecting efficient dose steps. Biometrical Journal, 36, 3–15.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Bauer, P., Rohmel, J., Maurer, W., & Hothorn, L. (1998). Testing strategies in multi-dose experiments including active control. Statistics in Medicine, 17, 2133–2146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bretz, F., Pinheiro, J. C., & Branson, M. (2005). Combining multiple comparisons and modeling techniques in dose-response studies. Biometrics, 61(3), 738–748.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, D. G., & Peace, K. E. (2011). Clinical trial data analysis using R. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman and Hall/CRC Biostatistics Series.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, D. G., Peace, K. E., & Zhang, P. (2017). Clinical trial data analysis using R and SAS (2nd ed.). Boca Raton, FL: Chapman and Hall/CRC Biostatistics Series.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chuang-Stein, C., & Li, Z. (2006). Analysis of dose response relationship based on categorical outcomes. In Ting, N. (Ed.), Dose finding in drug development (Chap. 13, pp. 200–219). Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cochran, W. G. (1954). Some methods for strengthening the common chi-squared tests. Biometrics, 10(4), 417–451.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Dunnett, C. W. (1955). A multiple comparison procedure for comparing several treatments with a control. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 50, 1096–1121.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, J. A. (2004). In defence of the dichotomy. Pharmaceutical Statistics, 3(2), 77–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacCallum, R. C., Zhang, S., Preacher, K. J., & Rucker, D. D. (2002). On the practice of dichotomization of quantitative variables. Psychological Methods, 7(1), 19–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCullagh, P. (1980). Regression model for ordinal data (with discussion). Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B, 42, 109–142.

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Newcombe, R. G. (1998a). Two-sided confidence intervals for the single proportion: Comparison of seven methods. Statistics in Medicine, 17, 857–872.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newcombe, R. G. (1998b). Interval estimation for the difference between independent proportions: Comparison of eleven methods. Statistics in Medicine, 17, 873–890.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pearson, K. (1900). On the criterion that a given system of deviations from the probable in the case of a correlated system of variables is such that it can be reasonably supposed to have arisen from random sampling. Philosophical Magazine Series 5 50(302), 157–175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snapinn, S. M., & Jiang, Q. (2007). Responder analysis and the assessment of a clinically relevant treatment effect. Trials, 8(31), 1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uryniak, T., Chan, I. S. F., Fedorov, V. V., Jiang, Q., Oppenheimer, L., Snapinn, S. W., et al. (2012). Responder analysis-A PhRMA position paper. Statistics in Biopharmaceutical Research, 3(3), 476–487.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, E. B. (1927). Probable inference, the law of succession, and statistical inference. Journal of American Statistical Association, 22, 209–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Naitee Ting .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Ting, N., Chen, DG., Ho, S., Cappelleri, J.C. (2017). Data Analysis of Dose-Ranging Trials for Binary Outcomes. In: Phase II Clinical Development of New Drugs. ICSA Book Series in Statistics. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-4194-5_10

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics