PubMed HealthSearch

PubMed · 8690812

Crossover trials with a binary response: a powerful method despite the carryover effect.

Abstract

The two-period crossover trial has the evident advantage that, by use of within-patient comparisons, the usual large between-patient variability is not used as a measure to compare treatments. A prerequisite, however, is that the order of the treatments does not substantially influence the outcome of the treatment. Crossover studies with a binary response (such as yes/no or present/absent), although widely used for initial screening of new compounds, have not previously been studied for such order effects. This study uses a mathematical model based on standard statistical tests to study to what extent such order effects, here identical to carryover effects, may reduce the power of detecting a treatment effect. It is concluded that, despite large carryover effects, the crossover study with a binary response remains a powerful method and that testing for carryover effects makes sense only if the null hypothesis of no treatment effect cannot be rejected.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

T J Cleophas, H J van Lier. 1996. Crossover trials with a binary response: a powerful method despite the carryover effect.. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1552-4604.1996.tb04188.x

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Multiple testing to establish superiority/equivalence of a new treatment compared with kappa standard treatments.

In this paper we develop multiple hypotheses testing procedures to compare a new treatment with a set of standard treatments in a clinical trial. The aim is to classify the new treatment with respect to each of the standards, by specifying those to which the new treatment is superior, those to which the new treatment is equivalent and those to which one can establish neither superiority nor equivalence. We propose several stepwise procedures and compare them with respect to their familywise error rates and power. The step-down methods SD1 and SD2 test for superiority first, followed by tests for equivalence for those comparisons where we cannot establish superiority. The step-up methods SU1 and SU2 test for equivalence first, followed by tests for superiority for those comparisons where we can establish at least equivalence. The methods SD3 and SU3 apply the tests for superiority and equivalence in pairs. All the methods require that we specify a threshold value delta > 0 in advance for defining equivalence. In applications where it is not possible to specify a value delta, we can use the method SD1 by testing for superiority first, followed by one-sided confidence limits on the efficacy differences for those comparisons where we cannot establish superiority.

Clinical Trials as Topic