Ji Lingyun, Alonzo Todd A
Department of Population and Public Health Sciences, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Clin Trials. 2025 Apr;22(2):131-141. doi: 10.1177/17407745241284786. Epub 2024 Oct 12.
Background/aimsFor cancers with low incidence, low event rates, and a time-to-event endpoint, a randomized non-inferiority trial designed based on the logrank test can require a large sample size with significantly prolonged enrollment duration, making such a non-inferiority trial not feasible. This article evaluates a design based on a non-inferiority test of proportions, compares its required sample size to the non-inferiority logrank test, assesses whether there are scenarios for which a non-inferiority test of proportions can be more efficient, and provides guidelines in usage of a non-inferiority test of proportions.MethodsThis article describes the sample size calculation for a randomized non-inferiority trial based on a non-inferiority logrank test or a non-inferiority test of proportions. The sample size required by the two design methods are compared for a wide range of scenarios, varying the underlying Weibull survival functions, the non-inferiority margin, and loss to follow-up rate.ResultsOur results showed that there are scenarios for which the non-inferiority test of proportions can have significantly reduced sample size. Specifically, the non-inferiority test of proportions can be considered for cancers with more than 80% long-term survival rate. We provide guidance in choice of this design approach based on parameters of the Weibull survival functions, the non-inferiority margin, and loss to follow-up rate.ConclusionFor cancers with low incidence and low event rates, a non-inferiority trial based on the logrank test is not feasible due to its large required sample size and prolonged enrollment duration. The use of a non-inferiority test of proportions can make a randomized non-inferiority Phase III trial feasible.
背景/目的
对于发病率低、事件发生率低且以事件发生时间为终点的癌症,基于对数秩检验设计的随机非劣效性试验可能需要大量样本且入组时间显著延长,从而使这种非劣效性试验不可行。本文评估了一种基于比例非劣效性检验的设计,将其所需样本量与非劣效性对数秩检验所需样本量进行比较,评估是否存在比例非劣效性检验更有效的情况,并提供比例非劣效性检验的使用指南。
方法
本文描述了基于非劣效性对数秩检验或比例非劣效性检验的随机非劣效性试验的样本量计算。在广泛的场景下比较了两种设计方法所需的样本量,这些场景包括不同的威布尔生存函数、非劣效性界值和失访率。
结果
我们的结果表明,在某些情况下,比例非劣效性检验的样本量可显著减少。具体而言,对于长期生存率超过80%的癌症可考虑使用比例非劣效性检验。我们根据威布尔生存函数的参数、非劣效性界值和失访率提供了选择这种设计方法的指导。
结论
对于发病率和事件发生率低的癌症,基于对数秩检验的非劣效性试验由于所需样本量大和入组时间长而不可行。使用比例非劣效性检验可使随机非劣效性III期试验可行。