The impact of allocation bias on test decisions in clinical trials with multiple endpoints using multiple testing strategies

Abstract

Background Considering multiple endpoints in clinical trials provide a more comprehensive understanding of treatment effects and may lead to increased power or reduced sample size, which may be beneficial in rare diseases. Besides the small sample sizes, allocation bias is an issue that affects the validity of these trials. We investigate the impact of allocation bias on testing decisions in clinical trials with multiple endpoints and offer a tool for selecting an appropriate randomization procedure (RP). Methods We derive a model for quantifying the effect of allocation bias depending on the RP in the case of two-arm parallel group trials with continuous multiple endpoints. We focus on two approaches to analyze multiple endpoints, either the Sidak procedure to show efficacy in at least one endpoint and the all-or-none procedure to show efficacy in all endpoints. Results To evaluate the impact of allocation bias on the test decision we propose a biasing policy for multiple endpoints. The impact of allocation on the test decision is measured by the family-wise error rate of the Sidak procedure and the type I error rate of the all-or-none procedure. Using the biasing policy we derive formulas to calculate these error rates. In simulations we show that, for the Sidak procedure as well as for the all-or-none procedure, allocation bias leads to inflation of the mean family-wise error and mean type I error, respectively. The strength of this inflation is affected by the choice of the RP. Conclusion Allocation bias should be considered during the design phase of a trial to increase validity. The developed methodology is useful for selecting an appropriate RP for a clinical trial with multiple endpoints to minimize allocation bias effects.