Mishra Akash, Nair N Sreekumaran, Harichandrakumar K T, Vs Binu, Satheesh Santhosh
Centre of Biostatistics, Institute of Medical Sciences, Banaras Hindu University (BHU), Varanasi, India.
Department of Biostatistics, Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research, Puducherry, India.
J Biopharm Stat. 2025 Apr 17:1-12. doi: 10.1080/10543406.2025.2489360.
In scenarios involving correlated endpoints, multivariate methods offer increased robustness for comparisons. However, understanding the individual contribution of each variable toward multivariate hypothesis rejection remains underexplored. Usually, this question is sidelined, and separate univariate analyses are performed. This paper addresses this gap by demonstrating the relative importance and contribution of variables toward the rejection of multivariate hypotheses, comparing it against a univariate approach using clinical trial data. Using the ACCORD lipid trial dataset, which includes lipid measurements of triglycerides (TG), low-density lipoprotein (LDL), and high-density lipoprotein (HDL), we employed Hotelling's T multivariate statistic for two-group comparisons. We showcased the significance and relative importance of contributions through standardized discriminant function coefficients and partial F tests. Additionally, we investigated the impact of varying correlation levels on the significance of each variable's contribution in multivariate versus univariate approaches. Our results revealed significant lipid differences in a multivariate context at the 12th and 36th months. Across both follow-ups, TG exhibited the highest relative importance and contribution, followed by HDL and LDL. Notably, in the 36th month, the univariate approach rendered LDL's contribution insignificant for group separation, contrasting with the significant contribution identified in the multivariate approach. Furthermore, the significance likelihood of variable contributions in group separation within the multivariate approach increased with rising correlation levels. The simulation technique and the power analysis was also adopted to characterize the features of the proposed method. Our approach enables the evaluation of the relative importance and significance of each variable's contribution within the multivariate framework. This methodology holds promise for enhancing the interpretation of clinical trial analysis outcomes, particularly when dealing with multiple correlated endpoints.
在涉及相关终点的情况下,多变量方法在比较中具有更高的稳健性。然而,每个变量对多变量假设拒绝的个体贡献仍未得到充分探索。通常,这个问题被搁置一旁,而是进行单独的单变量分析。本文通过展示变量对多变量假设拒绝的相对重要性和贡献来填补这一空白,并将其与使用临床试验数据的单变量方法进行比较。使用包括甘油三酯(TG)、低密度脂蛋白(LDL)和高密度脂蛋白(HDL)血脂测量值的ACCORD血脂试验数据集,我们采用霍特林T多变量统计进行两组比较。我们通过标准化判别函数系数和偏F检验展示了贡献的显著性和相对重要性。此外,我们研究了不同相关水平对多变量和单变量方法中每个变量贡献显著性的影响。我们的结果显示,在第12个月和第36个月的多变量背景下存在显著的血脂差异。在两次随访中,TG表现出最高的相对重要性和贡献,其次是HDL和LDL。值得注意的是,在第36个月时,单变量方法使LDL对组间分离的贡献不显著,这与多变量方法中确定的显著贡献形成对比。此外,多变量方法中组间分离变量贡献的显著性可能性随着相关水平的提高而增加。还采用了模拟技术和功效分析来表征所提出方法的特征。我们的方法能够评估多变量框架内每个变量贡献的相对重要性和显著性。这种方法有望增强对临床试验分析结果的解释,特别是在处理多个相关终点时。