Covariate Effect on Constancy Assumption in Noninferiority Clinical Trials

被引:0
|
作者
Xu, Siyan [1 ]
Barker, Kerry [2 ]
Menon, Sandeep [1 ,2 ]
D'Agostino, Ralph B. [1 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Boston Univ, Dept Biostat, Boston, MA 02118 USA
[2] Pfizer Inc, Cambridge, MA USA
[3] Boston Univ, Stat & Consulting Unit, Boston, MA 02118 USA
关键词
Constancy assumption; Sensitivity analysis; Noninferiority; Fixed margin method; Covariate; Synthesis method; INDIVIDUAL PATIENT DATA; NON-INFERIORITY TRIALS; STATISTICAL-METHODS; PLACEBO; DESIGN; ISSUES; MARGIN; BIOAVAILABILITY; METAANALYSIS;
D O I
10.1080/10543406.2014.941993
中图分类号
R9 [药学];
学科分类号
1007 ;
摘要
Noninferiority (NI) clinical trials are getting a lot of attention of late due to their direct application in biosimilar studies. Because of the missing placebo arm, NI is an indirect approach to demonstrate efficacy of a test treatment. One of the key assumptions in the NI test is the constancy assumption, that is, that the effect of the reference treatment is the same in current NI trials as in historical superiority trials. However, if a covariate interacts with the treatment arms, then changes in distribution of this covariate will likely result in violation of constancy assumption. In this article, we propose four new NI methods and compare them with two existing methods to evaluate the change of background constancy assumption on the performance of these six methods. To achieve this goal, we study the impact of three elements-(1) strength of covariate, (2) degree of interaction between covariate and treatment, and (3) differences in distribution of the covariate between historical and current trials-on both the type I error rate and power using three different measures of association: difference, log relative risk, and log odds ratio. Based on this research, we recommend using a modified covariate-adjustment fixed margin method.
引用
收藏
页码:1173 / 1189
页数:17
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Most noninferiority trials were not designed to preserve active comparator treatment effects
    Tsui, Michael
    Rehal, Sunita
    Jairath, Vipul
    Kahan, Brennan C.
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2019, 110 : 82 - 89
  • [42] A nonparametric test for proving noninferiority in clinical trials with ordered categorical data
    Munzel, U
    Hauschke, D
    PHARMACEUTICAL STATISTICS, 2003, 2 (01) : 31 - 37
  • [43] Superiority Inferences on Individual Endpoints Following Noninferiority Testing in Clinical Trials
    Logan, Brent R.
    Tamhane, Affit C.
    BIOMETRICAL JOURNAL, 2008, 50 (05) : 693 - 703
  • [44] Assessing the influence of treatment nonadherence on noninferiority trials using the tipping point approach
    Kim, Mimi
    Wang, Cuiling
    Xue, Xiaonan
    STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2019, 38 (04) : 650 - 659
  • [45] Noninferiority trials in oral medicine
    Ferreira Antunes, Jose Leopoldo
    Domaneschi, Carina
    Lemos, Celso Augusto, Jr.
    ORAL DISEASES, 2019, 25 (02) : 357 - 362
  • [46] The pros and cons of noninferiority trials
    Pocock, SJ
    FUNDAMENTAL & CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY, 2003, 17 (04) : 483 - 490
  • [47] Noninferiority Trials in Interventional Cardiology
    Kolte, Dhaval
    Aronow, Herbert D.
    Abbott, J. Dawn
    CIRCULATION-CARDIOVASCULAR INTERVENTIONS, 2017, 10 (08)
  • [48] Superior safety in noninferiority trials
    Bristol, DR
    BIOMETRICAL JOURNAL, 2005, 47 (01) : 75 - 81
  • [49] Noninferiority Randomized Controlled Trials
    Kim, Kevin S.
    Chan, An-Wen
    Belley-Cote, Emilie P.
    Drucker, Aaron M.
    JOURNAL OF INVESTIGATIVE DERMATOLOGY, 2022, 142 (07) : 1773 - 1777
  • [50] Analyzing noninferiority trials: it is time for advantage deficit assessment - an observational study of published noninferiority trials
    Gladstone, Beryl Primrose
    Vach, Werner
    OPEN ACCESS JOURNAL OF CLINICAL TRIALS, 2015, 7 : 11 - 21