Cited by 81Statistical Methods in Clinical TrialsProbability and Statistical ResearchStatistical Methods and Bayesian Inference

Closed Testing Procedures for Group Sequential Clinical Trials with Multiple Endpoints

Tang, Dei‐In, Geller, Nancy L.·1999·Biometrics

Abstract

A simple approach is given for conducting closed testing in clinical trials with multiple endpoints in which group sequential monitoring is planned. The approach allows a flexible stopping time; the earliest and latest stopping times are described. The paradigm is applicable both to clinical trials with multiple endpoints and to the one-sided multiple comparison problem of several treatments versus a control. The approach leads to enhancements of previous methods and suggestions for new methods. An example of a respiratory disease trial with four endpoints is given.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.0006-341x.1999.01188.x

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The PERSEUS study used a hierarchical testing procedure proposed by Tang and Geller (1999) to control overall family-wise type I error for the primary and key secondary endpoints.

    “A hierarchical testing procedure proposed by Tang and Geller (1999) 3 was used to control overall family-wise type I error for the primary and key secondary endpoints.”

    From Daratumumab, Bortezomib, Lenalidomide, and Dexamethasone for Multiple Myeloma. (2024) · cites this paper as Tang and Geller (1999)

  • The PERSEUS study used a hierarchical testing procedure proposed by Tang and Geller (1999) to control overall family-wise type I error for the primary and key secondary endpoints.

    “A hierarchical testing procedure proposed by Tang and Geller (1999) 3 was used to control overall family-wise type I error for the primary and key secondary endpoints.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tang, D., & Geller, N. L.
Affiliations
  • Nathan Kline Institute for Psychiatric Research (US)
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (US)
Corresponding author
Tang, Dei‐In
Venue
Biometrics
Published
1999-12
Volume
55
Issue
4
Pages
1188-1192
ISSN
  • 0006-341X (ISSN-L)
  • 1541-0420
OpenAlex
W1993632196
Cited by
81
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 4
FWCI
3.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Biometrics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Probability and Statistical Research
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
Keywords
closed testing procedure, multiple endpoints, multiple comparisons, early stopping, clinical trials
MeSH terms
Biometry, Clinical Trials as Topic, Humans, Respiratory Tract Diseases, Time Factors, Cross-Over Studies

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review