Transl Clin Pharmacol.  2014 Dec;22(2):78-82. 10.12793/tcp.2014.22.2.78.

On comparison of SAS codes with GLM and MIXED for the crossover studies with QT interval data

• Choi K
• Hong T
• Lee J

• KMID: 2050940
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.12793/tcp.2014.22.2.78

Abstract

The structural complexity of crossover studies for bioequivalence test confuses analysts and leaves them a hard choice among various programs. Our study reviews PROC GLM and PROC MIXED in SAS and compares widely used SAS codes for crossover studies. PROC MIXED based on REML is more recommended since it provides best linear unbiased estimator of the random between-subject effects and its variance. Our study also considers the covariance structure within subject over period which most PK/PD studies and crossover studies ignore. The QT interval data after the administration of moxifloxacin for a fixed time point are analyzed for the comparison of representative SAS codes for crossover studies.

Keyword

QT interval; PROC GLM; PROC MIXED; Crossover studies; repeated measures

MeSH Terms

Cross-Over Studies*
Therapeutic Equivalency

Reference

References

1. Rosner B. Fundamentals of Biostatistics. 7th ed.Cengage Learning;2000. p. 666–673.

2. Patterson S, Jones B. In: Keidling N (ed) Bioequivalence and Statistics in Clinical Pharmacology. Chapman and Hall/CRC, Boca Raton. 2006. 39–77.

3. Wallenstein S, Fisher AC. The analysis of two-period repeated measurements crossover design with application to clinical trials. Biometrics. 1977; 33:261–269.

4. Woods JR, Williams JG, Tavel M. The two-period crossover design in medical research. Ann Intern Med. 1989; 110:560–566.

5. Cheng J, Olbricht G, Gunaratna N, Kendall R, Lipka A, Paul S, et al. Mixed Models,. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.136.77. 49&rep=rep1&type=pdf, Accessed 29 October. 2014.

6. Jennrich RI, Schluchter MD. Unbalanced repeated-measures models with structured covariance matrices. Biometrics. 1986; 42:805–820.

7. Wolfinger RM, Chang M. Comparing the SAS^® GLM and MIXED Procedures for Repeated Measures,. http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/sas/library/mixedglm.pdf. Accessed 29 October. 2014.

8. Montgomery DC. Design and Analysis of Experiment, John Wiley & Sons. 1984. 71.

9. Park SH. Design of Experiments, Min-Young-SA. 2006. 58.

10. Meyers LS, Gamst G, Guarino AJ. Applied Multivariate Research, Design and Interpretation, Sage. 2006. 279–314.

11. Owen JS, Fiedler-Kelly J. Introduction to Population Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic Analysis with Nonlinear Mixed Effects Models, Wiley, New York. 2014. 9–29.

12. Brunelle R. Review various methods to perform the analysis of a 2 treatment, 2 period crossover study. http://www.math.iupui.edu/∼indyasa/crosover.pdf. Accessed 29 October. 2014.

13. SAS. 2014. ).,. http://support.sas.com/onlinedoc/913/getDoc/en/statug.hlp/glm_sect34.htm. Accessed 29 October 2014.

14. Saarinen F. Using mixed models in a crossover study with repeated measurements within periods,. http://www2.math.su.se/matstat/reports/se-rieb/2004/rep22/report.pdf. Accessed 29 October. 2014.

15. OehLert GW. A few words about REML. http://users.stat.umn.edu/∼corbett/classes/5303/REML.pdf. Accessed 29 October. 2014.

16. Pinheiro CJ, Bates DM. Mixed-Effects Models in S and S-PLUS. Springer;2004. p. 57–82.

17. Kiernan K, Tao J, Gibbs P. Tips and strategies for mixed modeling with SAS/Stat procedures, SAS global forum 2012,. http://support.sas.com/resources/papers/proceedings12/332–2012.pdf. Accessed 29 October. 2014.

18. Frison L, Pocock SJ. Repeated measures in clinical trials: Analysis using mean summary statistics and its implications for design. Stat Med. 1992; 11:1685–1704.

19. Sheiner LB, Beal SL. Evaluation of methods for estimating population pharmacokinetic parameters III. Monoexponential model: routine clinical pharmacokinetic data. J Pharmacokinet Biopharm. 1983; 11:303–319.

20. Mauchly JW. Significance test for sphericity of a normal n-variate distribution. Annals of Mathematical Statistics. 1940; 11:204–209.

21. Anderson TW. An Introduction to Multivariate Statistical Analysis. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.;1984. p. 440–442.

22. Huynh H, Feldt LS. Conditions under Which Mean Square Ratios in Repeated Measurements Designs Have Exact F-Distribution. Journal of the American Statistical Association. 1970; 65:1582–1589.

23. Sakamoto Y, Ishiguro M, Kitagawa G. Akaike information criterion statistics. Psychometrika. 1986; 54:539–541.

24. Schwarz G. Estimating the dimension of a model. Ann Statistics. 1978; 6:461–464.