Unger Joseph M, Mazza Gina L, Elsaid Mohamed I, Duan Fenhai, Dressler Emily V, Snavely Anna C, Enserro Danielle M, Pugh Stephanie L
SWOG Statistics and Data Management Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA 98109, United States.
Alliance Statistics and Data Management Center, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ 85259, United States.
J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2025 Mar 1;2025(68):3-9. doi: 10.1093/jncimonographs/lgae051.
Interpreting cancer clinical trial results often depends on addressing issues of multiplicity. When testing multiple hypotheses, unreliable findings can occur by chance due to the inflation of the type I error rate, the probability of mistakenly rejecting the null hypothesis when the null hypothesis is true. In this setting, researchers may often set the type I error rate (or the alpha level) low to limit false positive findings and the interpretation of a causal relationship where none exists. Conversely, overly conservative type I error control may result in declaring findings, that do not meet multiplicity-adjusted alpha levels, as false when they are actually true, reducing opportunities for new discovery. This presentation focuses on multiplicity adjustment in the context of clinical trials conducted within the NCI's Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP). Because federally sponsored trials often require long-term participation from patients and represent a substantial investment by taxpayers, striking the right balance between optimizing what is learned from these trials, while avoiding false positive results, should be a priority.
解读癌症临床试验结果通常取决于解决多重性问题。在检验多个假设时,由于I型错误率的膨胀,即当原假设为真时错误地拒绝原假设的概率,可能会偶然出现不可靠的结果。在这种情况下,研究人员可能经常将I型错误率(或α水平)设得较低,以限制假阳性结果以及不存在因果关系时对因果关系的解读。相反,过度保守的I型错误控制可能会导致将未达到多重性调整后α水平的结果判定为假,而实际上这些结果是真实的,从而减少了新发现的机会。本报告重点关注在国家癌症研究所社区肿瘤学研究项目(NCORP)内进行的临床试验背景下的多重性调整。由于联邦资助的试验通常需要患者长期参与,并且代表了纳税人的大量投资,在优化从这些试验中学到的知识与避免假阳性结果之间取得恰当平衡应该是首要任务。