Literature DB >> 20889572

A comparison of methods for sample size estimation for non-inferiority studies with binary outcomes.

Steven A Julious1, Roger J Owen.   

Abstract

Non-inferiority trials are motivated in the context of clinical research where a proven active treatment exists and placebo-controlled trials are no longer acceptable for ethical reasons. Instead, active-controlled trials are conducted where a treatment is compared to an established treatment with the objective of demonstrating that it is non-inferior to this treatment. We review and compare the methodologies for calculating sample sizes and suggest appropriate methods to use. We demonstrate how the simplest method of using the anticipated response is predominantly consistent with simulations. In the context of trials with binary outcomes with expected high proportions of positive responses, we show how the sample size is quite sensitive to assumptions about the control response. We recommend when designing such a study that sensitivity analyses be performed with respect to the underlying assumptions and that the Bayesian methods described in this article be adopted to assess sample size.

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20889572     DOI: 10.1177/0962280210378945

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res        ISSN: 0962-2802            Impact factor:   3.021


  6 in total

1.  A systematic approach for establishing the range of recommended weight gain in pregnancy.

Authors:  Jennifer A Hutcheon; Lisa M Bodnar
Journal:  Am J Clin Nutr       Date:  2014-06-25       Impact factor: 7.045

2.  Sample Size Calculation: Inaccurate A Priori Assumptions for Nuisance Parameters Can Greatly Affect the Power of a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Elsa Tavernier; Bruno Giraudeau
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-07-14       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  Sample Size Estimation for Non-Inferiority Trials: Frequentist Approach versus Decision Theory Approach.

Authors:  A C Bouman; A J ten Cate-Hoek; B L T Ramaekers; M A Joore
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-06-15       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  THE AUTHORS REPLY.

Authors:  Jennifer A Hutcheon; Deshayne B Fell; Michael L Jackson; Michael S Kramer; Justin R Ortiz; David A Savitz; Robert W Platt
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2017-05-01       Impact factor: 4.897

5.  Designing noninferiority tuberculosis treatment trials: Identifying practical advantages for drug regimens with acceptable effectiveness.

Authors:  Piero L Olliaro; Michel Vaillant
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2019-07-12       Impact factor: 11.069

6.  Incomplete data analysis of non-inferiority clinical trials: Difference between binomial proportions case.

Authors:  Yulia Sidi; Ofer Harel
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials Commun       Date:  2020-05-04
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.