The choice of the noninferiority margin in clinical trials was driven by baseline risk, type of primary outcome, and benefits of new treatment

被引:10
|
作者
Gayet-Ageron, Angele [1 ,2 ]
Agoritsas, Thomas [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Rudaz, Sandrine [1 ,2 ]
Courvoisier, Delphine [1 ,2 ]
Perneger, Thomas [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Hosp Geneva, Div Clin Epidemiol, CH-1211 Geneva 14, Switzerland
[2] Fac Med, CH-1211 Geneva 14, Switzerland
[3] McMaster Univ, Fac Hlth Sci, Dept Clin Epidemiol & Biostat, Hamilton, ON L8S 4K1, Canada
关键词
Noninferiority margin; Noninferiority study design; Clinical trial; Sample size; Randomized controlled trials; Primary outcome; Minimal clinically important difference; NON-INFERIORITY; EQUIVALENCE; DESIGN;
D O I
10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.01.017
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Objectives: To explore characteristics of clinical trials that influence the choice of the noninferiority margin (NIM) when planning the trial. Study Design and Setting: We conducted an experimental survey among corresponding authors of randomized controlled trials indexed in MEDLINE. We described two hypothetical studies and asked the respondents' opinion on the largest loss of effectiveness that is clinically negligible (or the smallest lost of effectiveness that is clinically important in the superiority scenario). We randomly manipulated four study attributes in each vignette, using a factorial design. Results: A total of 364 researchers participated. The values for NIMs were significantly lower than the differences to be detected in a superiority trial. The MM was smaller when the primary outcome was mortality compared with treatment failure, when baseline risk in the control arm was lower, and when the advantage of the new treatment was a lower cost compared with having fewer side effects. In contrast, the population age group under study and the difficulty to recruit patients showed no effect on the choice of the MM. Conclusion: In our experimental study, the factors associated with lower NIMs were mortality as a primary outcome, low baseline risk, and a less costly new treatment. (C) 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:1144 / 1151
页数:8
相关论文
共 5 条
  • [1] Considerations regarding choice of primary outcome in clinical trials in deprescribing COMMENT
    Lundby, Carina
    Pottegard, Anton
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY, 2022, 88 (07) : 3032 - 3034
  • [2] The Adjustment of the Type I Error Rate in Noninferiority Trials with -Margin Approach: Each of Two Different New Drugs is Approved with Two Independent Trials with the Same Active Control
    Kang, Seung-Ho
    Ryu, Yuman
    JOURNAL OF BIOPHARMACEUTICAL STATISTICS, 2011, 21 (03) : 498 - 510
  • [3] Timed walk as primary outcome measure of treatment response in clinical trials for HTLV-1-associated myelopathy: A feasibility study
    Martin F.
    Inoue E.
    Cortese I.C.M.
    de Almeida Kruschewsky R.
    Adonis A.
    Grassi M.F.R.
    Galvão-Castro B.
    Jacobson S.
    Yamano Y.
    Taylor G.P.
    Bland M.
    Pilot and Feasibility Studies, 1 (1)
  • [4] Primary outcome indices in illicit drug dependence treatment research: systematic approach to selection and measurement of drug use end-points in clinical trials
    Donovan, Dennis M.
    Bigelow, George E.
    Brigham, Gregory S.
    Carroll, Kathleen M.
    Cohen, Allan J.
    Gardin, John G.
    Hamilton, John A.
    Huestis, Marilyn A.
    Hughes, John R.
    Lindblad, Robert
    Marlatt, G. Alan
    Preston, Kenzie L.
    Selzer, Jeffrey A.
    Somoza, Eugene C.
    Wakim, Paul G.
    Wells, Elizabeth A.
    ADDICTION, 2012, 107 (04) : 694 - 708
  • [5] Rationale, design, and baseline characteristics of the CArdiovascular safety and Renal Microvascular outcomE study with LINAgliptin - (CARMELINA®): a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial in patients with type 2 diabetes and high cardio-renal risk
    Rosenstock, Julio
    Perkovic, Vlado
    Alexander, John H.
    Cooper, Mark E.
    Marx, Nikolaus
    Pencina, Michael J.
    Toto, Robert D.
    Wanner, Christoph
    Zinman, Bernard
    Baanstra, David
    Pfarr, Egon
    Mattheus, Michaela
    Broedl, Uli C.
    Woerle, Hans-Juergen
    George, Jyothis T.
    von Eynatten, Maximilian
    McGuire, Darren K.
    CARDIOVASCULAR DIABETOLOGY, 2018, 17