IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0103616.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Choice of Non-Inferiority (NI) Margins Does Not Protect against Degradation of Treatment Effects on an Average – An Observational Study of Registered and Published NI Trials

Author

Listed:
  • Beryl Primrose Gladstone
  • Werner Vach

Abstract

Objective: NI margins have to be chosen appropriately to control the risk of degradation of treatment effects in non-inferiority (NI) trials. We aimed to study whether the current choice of NI margins protects sufficiently against a degradation of treatment effect on an average. Study Design and Setting: NI trials reflecting current practice were assembled and for each trial, the NI margin was translated into a likelihood of degradation. The likelihood of degradation was calculated as the conditional probability of a treatment being harmful given that it is declared non-inferior in the trial, using simulation. Its distribution among the NI trials was then studied to assess the potential risk of degradation. Results: The median (lower/upper quartile) NI margin among 112 binary outcome NI trials corresponded to an odds ratio of 0.57(0.45, 0.66), while among 38 NI trials with continuous outcome, to a Cohen’s d of −0.42(−0.54, −0.31) and a hazard ratio of 0.82(0.73, 0.86) among 24 survival outcome NI trials. Overall, the median likelihood of degradation was 56% (45%, 62%). Conclusion: Only two fifths of the current NI trials had a likelihood of degradation lower than 50%, suggesting that, in majority of the NI trials, there is no sufficient protection against degradation on an average. We suggest a third hurdle for the choice of NI margins, thus contributing a sufficient degree of protection.

Suggested Citation

  • Beryl Primrose Gladstone & Werner Vach, 2014. "Choice of Non-Inferiority (NI) Margins Does Not Protect against Degradation of Treatment Effects on an Average – An Observational Study of Registered and Published NI Trials," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(7), pages 1-12, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0103616
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0103616
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0103616
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0103616&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0103616?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0103616. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.