 |
|
Quality of Reporting of Noninferiority and Equivalence Randomized Trials
Anne Le Henanff, MSc;
Bruno Giraudeau, PhD;
Gabriel Baron, MSc;
Philippe Ravaud, MD, PhD
JAMA. 2006;295:1147-1151.
Context Noninferiority and equivalence trials aim to show that the experimental treatment is not clinically worse than (noninferior) or clinically similar to (equivalent) a control active treatment. These study objectives imply particular planning and analysis.
Objective To assess the methodologic quality of reports of randomized controlled trials of noninferiority and equivalence.
Design We searched MEDLINE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for reports of randomized controlled trials of noninferiority and equivalence hypotheses published between January 1, 2003, and December 31, 2004.
Main Outcome Measures Data extracted by use of a standardized form involved assessment of choice of noninferiority or equivalence margins, sample size calculation, sets of patients analyzed, method of statistical testing and reporting results, and conclusions.
Results A total of 162 reports were included in the analysis (116 reports of noninferiority and 46 of equivalence). The margin defining noninferiority or equivalence was described in most reports (156 [96.3%]), with justification of the margin in only 33 (20.4%). Almost one quarter of the reports (35 [21.6%]) did not describe a sample size calculation, and an additional 11 (6.8%) did not take into account a prespecified noninferiority or equivalence margin. Less than half of the reports (69 [42.6%]) described both an intent-to-treat (ITT; all randomized patients are included in the analysis) or modified ITT (patients who never received treatment are excluded) and per-protocol (patients who did not complete the treatment are excluded) analysis, and only about half of those (39 [56.5%]) described both types of results. Results were displayed with confidence intervals in 136 reports (84.0%). Only 33 articles (20.3%) fulfilled reporting requirements specific to noninferiority and equivalence trials, 4 of them (12.1%) with misleading conclusions.
Conclusions Reporting of noninferiority and equivalence trials has important deficiencies: absence of noninferiority or equivalence margin, only an ITT (or a per-protocol) analysis performed, and results not adequately reported. Moreover, even for articles fulfilling these requirements, conclusions are sometimes misleading.
Author Affiliations: Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM) U738, Paris, and Département d’Epidémiologie Biostatistique et Recherche Clinique, Groupe Hospitalier Bichat-Claude Bernard (Assistance Publique, Hôpitaux de Paris), Faculté Xavier Bichat (Université Paris 7), Paris, France (Ms Le Henanff, Mr Baron, and Dr Ravaud); INSERM Centre d’Investigation Clinique 202, Tours, INSERM U 717, Paris, Université François-Rabelais, Tours, and Centre Hospitalier Règional Universitaire de Tours (Dr Giraudeau), France.
RELATED ARTICLES
Reporting of Noninferiority and Equivalence Randomized Trials: An Extension of the CONSORT Statement
Gilda Piaggio, Diana R. Elbourne, Douglas G. Altman, Stuart J. Pocock, Stephen J. W. Evans, and for the CONSORT Group
JAMA. 2006;295(10):1152-1160.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Lessons From and Cautions About Noninferiority and Equivalence Randomized Trials
Peter C. Gøtzsche
JAMA. 2006;295(10):1172-1174.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES
|
Tests for equivalence or non-inferiority - why?
DTB 2008;46:55-56.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Effects of Age, Gender, Obesity, and Diabetes on the Efficacy and Safety of the Selective A2A Agonist Regadenoson Versus Adenosine in Myocardial Perfusion Imaging: Integrated ADVANCE-MPI Trial Results
Cerqueira et al.
J Am Coll Cardiol Img 2008;1:307-316.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Promoting Regular Mammography Screening II. Results From a Randomized Controlled Trial in US Women Veterans
Vernon et al.
JNCI J Natl Cancer Inst 2008;100:347-358.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Anidulafungin and fluconazole for candidiasis.
Aberegg et al.
NEJM 2007;357:1347-1348.
FULL TEXT
Importance and Challenges of Studying Marketed Drugs: What Is a Phase IV Study? Common Clinical Research Designs, Registries, and Self-Reporting Systems
Glasser et al.
J Clin Pharmacol 2007;47:1074-1086.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Sample size in studies on diagnostic accuracy in ophthalmology: a literature survey
Bochmann et al.
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2007;91:898-900.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Non-Inferiority Trials in Surgical Oncology
Fueglistaler et al.
Ann. Surg. Oncol. 2007;14:1532-1539.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Update in Critical Care 2006
Milbrandt et al.
Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 2007;175:638-648.
FULL TEXT
Clinical trial design issues: at least 10 things you should look for in clinical trials.
Glasser and Howard
J Clin Pharmacol 2006;46:1106-1115.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Good Enough: A Primer on the Analysis and Interpretation of Noninferiority Trials
Kaul and Diamond
ANN INTERN MED 2006;145:62-69.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Lessons From and Cautions About Noninferiority and Equivalence Randomized Trials
Gotzsche
JAMA 2006;295:1172-1174.
FULL TEXT
|
