Literature DB >> 20209669

A covariate-adjustment regression model approach to noninferiority margin definition.

Lei Nie1, Guoxing Soon.   

Abstract

To maintain the interpretability of the effect of experimental treatment (EXP) obtained from a noninferiority trial, current statistical approaches often require the constancy assumption. This assumption typically requires that the control treatment effect in the population of the active control trial is the same as its effect presented in the population of the historical trial. To prevent constancy assumption violation, clinical trial sponsors were recommended to make sure that the design of the active control trial is as close to the design of the historical trial as possible. However, these rigorous requirements are rarely fulfilled in practice. The inevitable discrepancies between the historical trial and the active control trial have led to debates on many controversial issues. Without support from a well-developed quantitative method to determine the impact of the discrepancies on the constancy assumption violation, a correct judgment seems difficult. In this paper, we present a covariate-adjustment generalized linear regression model approach to achieve two goals: (1) to quantify the impact of population difference between the historical trial and the active control trial on the degree of constancy assumption violation and (2) to redefine the active control treatment effect in the active control trial population if the quantification suggests an unacceptable violation. Through achieving goal (1), we examine whether or not a population difference leads to an unacceptable violation. Through achieving goal (2), we redefine the noninferiority margin if the violation is unacceptable. This approach allows us to correctly determine the effect of EXP in the noninferiority trial population when constancy assumption is violated due to the population difference. We illustrate the covariate-adjustment approach through a case study.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20209669     DOI: 10.1002/sim.3871

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stat Med        ISSN: 0277-6715            Impact factor:   2.373


  4 in total

1.  Adaptive non-inferiority margins under observable non-constancy.

Authors:  Brett Hanscom; James P Hughes; Brian D Williamson; Deborah Donnell
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2018-10-08       Impact factor: 3.021

2.  Meeting the demand for more sophisticated study designs. A proposal for a new type of clinical trial: the hybrid design.

Authors:  Guoxing G Soon; Lei Nie; Thomas Hammerstrom; Wen Zeng; Haitao Chu
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2011-01-01       Impact factor: 2.692

3.  Methods for Population-Adjusted Indirect Comparisons in Health Technology Appraisal.

Authors:  David M Phillippo; Anthony E Ades; Sofia Dias; Stephen Palmer; Keith R Abrams; Nicky J Welton
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2017-08-19       Impact factor: 2.583

4.  Handling an uncertain control group event risk in non-inferiority trials: non-inferiority frontiers and the power-stabilising transformation.

Authors:  Matteo Quartagno; A Sarah Walker; Abdel G Babiker; Rebecca M Turner; Mahesh K B Parmar; Andrew Copas; Ian R White
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2020-02-06       Impact factor: 2.279

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.