Type‐I‐error rate inflation in mixed models for repeated measures caused by ambiguous or incomplete model specifications

Abstract

AbstractPre‐specification of the primary analysis model is a pre‐requisite to control the family‐wise type‐I‐error rate (T1E) at the intended level in confirmatory clinical trials. However, mixed models for repeated measures (MMRM) have been shown to be poorly specified in study protocols. The magnitude of a resulting T1E rate inflation is still unknown. This investigation aims to quantify the magnitude of the T1E rate inflation depending on the type and number of unspecified model items as well as different trial characteristics. We simulated a randomized, double‐blind, parallel group, phase III clinical trial under the assumption that there is no treatment effect at any time point. The simulated data was analysed using different clusters, each including several MMRMs that are compatible with the imprecise pre‐specification of the MMRM. T1E rates for each cluster were estimated. A significant T1E rate inflation could be shown for ambiguous model specifications with a maximum T1E rate of 7.6% [7.1%; 8.1%]. The results show that the magnitude of the T1E rate inflation depends on the type and number of unspecified model items as well as the sample size and allocation ratio. The imprecise specification of nuisance parameters may not lead to a significant T1E rate inflation. However, the results of this simulation study rather underestimate the true T1E rate inflation. In conclusion, imprecise MMRM specifications may lead to a substantial inflation of the T1E rate and can damage the ability to generate confirmatory evidence in pivotal clinical trials.