Wang Wenwen, Huang Yaru, Xia Jielai, Wang Ling, Li Chen
Department of Health Statistics, School of Preventive Medicine, Ministry of Education Key Lab of Hazard Assessment and Control in Special Operational Environment, Fourth Military Medical University, Xi'an, 710042, Shaanxi Province, China.
Contemp Clin Trials Commun. 2024 Oct 18;42:101383. doi: 10.1016/j.conctc.2024.101383. eCollection 2024 Dec.
Although the risk difference (RD) is the most common and well explored functional form for testing efficacy with dichotomous endpoint, odds ratio (OR) is also suggested and well applied measure for non-inferiority (NI) trials. Since the construction and interpretation of these function forms are quite different, this study aims to provide detailed discussions and comprehensive comparisons on the design and testing approach for RD and OR scales for the fixed and group sequential three-arm NI trials under various of situations. The sample size determinations and testing approaches for assessing NI of a new treatment in three-arm clinical trials for RD and OR scales were reviewed comprehensively. Simulation studies are conducted for hundreds of scenarios with parameter configurations of the response rates, randomized allocations, NI margins and interim analysis. The operating characteristic (OC) of RD and OR scales based on the MLE and RMLE methods were thoroughly investigated. A trial example was designed and analyzed to demonstrate the methodologies. It is found that sample size determination on OR scale gives smaller sample size and robust procedure compared to RD scale in the majority of situations. When evaluating the behaviors of the attained power, the RMLE methods based on OR scale outperforms the MLE method and tend to have more power to reject the null hypothesis especially under the small sample size situations. Compared to the fixed design, the group sequential design has better OC, which provides a comparable power while needing smaller total average sample sizes for all cases. In addition, we suggest a lower significance level with a higher power for the sample size determination in the superiority test stage in the group sequential design, which can significantly reduce the total sample sizes while the number of subjects in the placebo group does not increase much. It can offer some recommendations for the investigators to choose the optimal endpoints and parameter configurations to design a three-arm NI trial under certain situations.
尽管风险差异(RD)是用于二分终点疗效测试最常见且研究充分的函数形式,但优势比(OR)也被推荐用于非劣效性(NI)试验且应用广泛。由于这些函数形式的构建和解释差异较大,本研究旨在针对各种情况下固定和序贯三臂NI试验的RD和OR量表的设计与测试方法进行详细讨论和全面比较。全面回顾了三臂临床试验中RD和OR量表评估新治疗非劣效性的样本量确定和测试方法。针对数百种具有反应率、随机分配、非劣效性界值和期中分析参数配置的情景进行了模拟研究。深入研究了基于最大似然估计(MLE)和稳健最大似然估计(RMLE)方法的RD和OR量表的操作特征(OC)。设计并分析了一个试验示例以演示这些方法。结果发现,在大多数情况下,与RD量表相比,基于OR量表的样本量确定得到的样本量更小且程序更稳健。在评估所达到的检验效能的行为时,基于OR量表的RMLE方法优于MLE方法,尤其在小样本量情况下往往更有能力拒绝原假设。与固定设计相比,序贯设计具有更好的OC,在所有情况下能提供相当的检验效能,同时所需的总平均样本量更小。此外,我们建议在序贯设计的优效性检验阶段确定样本量时采用较低的显著性水平和较高的检验效能,这可以显著减少总样本量,而安慰剂组的受试者数量增加不多。它可以为研究者在某些情况下选择最优终点和参数配置以设计三臂NI试验提供一些建议。