Volume 22, Issue 6
Research Article

Assessing non‐inferiority of a new treatment in a three‐arm clinical trial including a placebo

Iris Pigeot

Corresponding Author

E-mail address: pigeot@bips.uni‐bremen.de

Institute of Statistics, University of Bremen, Postfach 330440, 28334 Bremen, Germany

Bremen Institute for Prevention Research and Social Medicine, Linzer Str. 8‐10, 28359 Bremen, Germany

Institute of Statistics, University of Bremen, Postfach 330440, 28334 Bremen, GermanySearch for more papers by this author
Juliane Schäfer

Institute of Statistics, University of Munich, Ludwigstr. 33, 80539 Munich, Germany

Search for more papers by this author
Joachim Röhmel

Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices, Friedrich‐Ebert‐Allee 38, 53113 Bonn, Germany

Search for more papers by this author
Dieter Hauschke

Department of Biometry, ALTANA Pharma AG, Byk‐Gulden‐Str. 2, 78467 Konstanz, Germany

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 21 February 2003
Citations: 95

Abstract

In non‐inferiority trials, where non‐inferiority of a new experimental drug compared to an active control has to be shown, it may be advisable to use an additional placebo group for internal validation if ethically justifiable. The focus of this paper is on such designs. Assuming normality and homogeneity of variances we will derive a statistical test procedure which turns out to be equivalent to the assessment based on Fieller's confidence interval. Based on the power function of this test, sample size calculations are carried out to achieve a given power. Additionally, the optimal allocation of the total sample size is derived. As an alternative to this parametric procedure, the bootstrap percentile interval is discussed and finally compared with Fieller's confidence interval in a study on mildly asthmatic patients. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Number of times cited according to CrossRef: 95

  • Effect of electroacupuncture versus solifenacin for moderate and severe overactive bladder: a multi-centre, randomized controlled trial study protocol, BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies, 10.1186/s12906-020-03018-y, 20, 1, (2020).
  • Electroacupuncture versus solifenacin for women with urgency-predominant mixed urinary incontinence: a protocol for a three-armed non-inferiority randomized controlled trial, BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies, 10.1186/s12906-019-2784-1, 20, 1, (2020).
  • Simultaneous confidence interval for assessing non‐inferiority with assay sensitivity in a three‐arm trial with binary endpoints, Pharmaceutical Statistics, 10.1002/pst.2010, 19, 5, (518-531), (2020).
  • New approaches for testing non-inferiority for three-arm trials with Poisson distributed outcomes, Biostatistics, 10.1093/biostatistics/kxaa014, (2020).
  • Sample Size Calculation for “Gold-Standard” Noninferiority Trials With Fixed Margins and Negative Binomial Endpoints, Statistics in Biopharmaceutical Research, 10.1080/19466315.2020.1766551, (1-13), (2020).
  • Sample size calculations for noninferiority trials for time-to-event data using the concept of proportional time, Journal of Applied Statistics, 10.1080/02664763.2020.1753026, (1-24), (2020).
  • Notes on Exact Power Calculations for t Tests and Analysis of Covariance , Statistics in Biopharmaceutical Research, 10.1080/19466315.2019.1707110, (1-3), (2020).
  • Penalized Fieller's confidence interval for the ratio of bivariate normal means, Biometrics, 10.1111/biom.13363, 0, 0, (2020).
  • Sequential parallel comparison design for “gold standard” noninferiority trials with a prespecified margin, Biometrical Journal, 10.1002/bimj.201800394, 61, 6, (1493-1506), (2019).
  • Simultaneous confidence intervals for ratios with application to the gold standard design with more than one experimental treatment, Statistics in Medicine, 10.1002/sim.8365, 38, 28, (5350-5360), (2019).
  • Bayesian Approach for Assessing Non-Inferiority in Three-Arm Trials for Risk Ratio and Odds Ratio, Statistics in Biopharmaceutical Research, 10.1080/19466315.2018.1554504, 11, 1, (34-43), (2019).
  • Biostatistical Assessment of Mutagenicity Studies: A Stepwise Confidence Procedure, Journal of Probability and Statistics, 10.1155/2019/3249097, 2019, (1-8), (2019).
  • Design and analysis of a 3‐arm noninferiority trial with a prespecified margin for the hazard ratio, Pharmaceutical Statistics, 10.1002/pst.1875, 17, 5, (489-503), (2018).
  • Bayesian approach for assessing noninferiority in a three‐arm trial with binary endpoint, Pharmaceutical Statistics, 10.1002/pst.1851, 17, 4, (342-357), (2018).
  • Non-inferiority testing for risk ratio, odds ratio and number needed to treat in three-arm trial, Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, 10.1016/j.csda.2018.08.018, (2018).
  • Blinded sample size re‐estimation in three‐arm trials with ‘gold standard’ design, Statistics in Medicine, 10.1002/sim.7356, 36, 23, (3636-3653), (2017).
  • Non-inferiority test based on transformations for non-normal distributions, Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, 10.1016/j.csda.2016.10.004, 113, (73-87), (2017).
  • Trial of Electrical Direct-Current Therapy versus Escitalopram for Depression, New England Journal of Medicine, 10.1056/NEJMoa1612999, 376, 26, (2523-2533), (2017).
  • Generalized simultaneous confidence regions for regression coefficients and their ratios, Journal of Statistical Computation and Simulation, 10.1080/00949655.2017.1299735, 87, 10, (1940-1950), (2017).
  • Study duration for three-arm non-inferiority survival trials designed for accrual by cohorts, Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 10.1177/0962280216633908, 27, 2, (507-520), (2016).
  • A studentized permutation test for three‐arm trials in the ‘gold standard’ design, Statistics in Medicine, 10.1002/sim.7176, 36, 6, (883-898), (2016).
  • Group-sequential three-arm noninferiority clinical trial designs, Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics, 10.1080/10543406.2016.1148710, 27, 1, (1-24), (2016).
  • Sample size determination for a three-arm equivalence trial of Poisson and negative binomial responses, Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics, 10.1080/10543406.2016.1269787, 27, 2, (239-256), (2016).
  • Some practical considerations in three‐arm non‐inferiority trial design, Pharmaceutical Statistics, 10.1002/pst.1779, 15, 6, (550-559), (2016).
  • New Generalized p -Value Approach for Noninferiority Analysis , Statistics in Biopharmaceutical Research, 10.1080/19466315.2015.1093958, 8, 1, (35-39), (2016).
  • Applications, Group Sequential and Confirmatory Adaptive Designs in Clinical Trials, 10.1007/978-3-319-32562-0_5, (101-130), (2016).
  • Group-Sequential Three-Arm Non-inferiority Clinical Trials, Group-Sequential Clinical Trials with Multiple Co-Objectives, 10.1007/978-4-431-55900-9_6, (81-95), (2016).
  • A more efficient three-arm non-inferiority test based on pooled estimators of the homogeneous variance, Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 10.1177/0962280216681036, (096228021668103), (2016).
  • Noninferiority studies with multiple reference treatments, Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 10.1177/0962280215576017, 26, 3, (1295-1307), (2015).
  • Design and analysis of three‐arm trials with negative binomially distributed endpoints, Statistics in Medicine, 10.1002/sim.6738, 35, 4, (505-521), (2015).
  • Bayesian approach for assessing non‐inferiority in a three‐arm trial with pre‐specified margin, Statistics in Medicine, 10.1002/sim.6746, 35, 5, (695-708), (2015).
  • Translational Science Biostatistics, Principles of Translational Science in Medicine, 10.1016/B978-0-12-800687-0.00029-3, (267-280), (2015).
  • The Escitalopram versus Electric Current Therapy for Treating Depression Clinical Study (ELECT-TDCS): rationale and study design of a non-inferiority, triple-arm, placebo-controlled clinical trial, Sao Paulo Medical Journal, 10.1590/1516-3180.2014.00351712, 133, 3, (252-263), (2015).
  • Simultaneous Confidence Intervals for Ratios of Fixed Effect Parameters in Linear Mixed Models, Communications in Statistics - Simulation and Computation, 10.1080/03610918.2013.849741, 45, 5, (1704-1717), (2014).
  • Noninferiority Studies with Multiple New Treatments and Heterogeneous Variances, Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics, 10.1080/10543406.2014.920346, 25, 5, (958-971), (2014).
  • Correcting for non‐compliance in randomized non‐inferiority trials with active and placebo control using structural models, Statistics in Medicine, 10.1002/sim.6392, 34, 6, (950-965), (2014).
  • Testing non-inferiority of a new treatment in three-arm clinical trials with binary endpoints, BMC Medical Research Methodology, 10.1186/1471-2288-14-134, 14, 1, (2014).
  • Sample Size Determination for a Three-Arm Equivalence Trial of Normally Distributed Responses, Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics, 10.1080/10543406.2014.948552, 24, 6, (1190-1202), (2014).
  • Nonparametric Method for a Non-inferiority Test using Confidence Interval, Korean Journal of Applied Statistics, 10.5351/KJAS.2014.27.5.833, 27, 5, (833-842), (2014).
  • Group sequential designs for three‐arm ‘gold standard’ non‐inferiority trials with fixed margin, Statistics in Medicine, 10.1002/sim.5950, 32, 28, (4875-4889), (2013).
  • Design and semiparametric analysis of non‐inferiority trials with active and placebo control for censored time‐to‐event data, Statistics in Medicine, 10.1002/sim.5769, 32, 18, (3055-3066), (2013).
  • Active-Controlled Clinical Trials, Modern Clinical Trial Analysis, 10.1007/978-1-4614-4322-3, (167-182), (2013).
  • Three-Arm Noninferiority Trials with a Prespecified Margin for Inference of the Difference in the Proportions of Binary Endpoints, Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics, 10.1080/10543406.2013.789893, 23, 4, (774-789), (2013).
  • The ethics of placebo-controlled trials: Methodological justifications, Contemporary Clinical Trials, 10.1016/j.cct.2013.09.003, 36, 2, (510-514), (2013).
  • A More Powerful Test Based on Ratio Distribution for Retention Noninferiority Hypothesis, Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics, 10.1080/10543406.2011.616968, 23, 2, (346-360), (2013).
  • Scientific considerations for assessing biosimilar products, Statistics in Medicine, 10.1002/sim.5571, 32, 3, (370-381), (2012).
  • Statistical assessment of biosimilarity based on relative distance between follow‐on biologics, Statistics in Medicine, 10.1002/sim.5582, 32, 3, (382-392), (2012).
  • Extension of three‐arm non‐inferiority studies to trials with multiple new treatments, Statistics in Medicine, 10.1002/sim.5467, 31, 24, (2833-2843), (2012).
  • Multiple comparisons to both a negative and a positive control, Pharmaceutical Statistics, 10.1002/pst.503, 11, 1, (74-81), (2012).
  • A general approach for sample size calculation for the three‐arm ‘gold standard’ non‐inferiority design, Statistics in Medicine, 10.1002/sim.5461, 31, 28, (3579-3596), (2012).
  • A generalized p -value approach for assessing noninferiority in a three-arm trial , Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 10.1177/0962280210395739, 22, 3, (261-277), (2011).
  • Three-Arm Non-Inferiority Trials, Design and Analysis of Non-Inferiority Trials, 10.1201/b11039-7, (149-165), (2011).
  • Response to Joachim Röhmel and Iris Pigeot, Statistics in Medicine, 10.1002/sim.4313, 30, 26, (3165-3165), (2011).
  • Assessing noninferiority in a three‐arm trial using the Bayesian approach, Statistics in Medicine, 10.1002/sim.4244, 30, 15, (1795-1808), (2011).
  • Noninferiority Trial Design, Modern Issues and Methods in Biostatistics, 10.1007/978-1-4419-9842-2_3, (59-86), (2011).
  • On the three‐arm non‐inferiority trial including a placebo with a prespecified margin, Statistics in Medicine, 10.1002/sim.4099, 30, 3, (224-231), (2010).
  • P -Values, Evidence, and Multiplicity Considerations for Controlled Clinical Trials , Encyclopedia of Biopharmaceutical Statistics, 10.3109/9781439822463, (949-961), (2010).
  • A Comparison of Multiple Testing Procedures for the Gold Standard Non-Inferiority Trial, Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics, 10.1080/10543401003618942, 20, 5, (911-926), (2010).
  • Are We Looking for Superiority, Equivalence, or Noninferiority? Asking the Right Question and Answering It Correctly, Annals of Emergency Medicine, 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2010.01.024, 55, 5, (408-411), (2010).
  • A group sequential type design for three‐arm non‐inferiority trials with binary endpoints, Biometrical Journal, 10.1002/bimj.200900188, 52, 4, (504-518), (2010).
  • Nonparametric non‐inferiority analyses in the three‐arm design with active control and placebo, Statistics in Medicine, 10.1002/sim.3727, 28, 29, (3643-3656), (2009).
  • Acupuncture in acute herpes zoster pain therapy (ACUZoster) – design and protocol of a randomised controlled trial, BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine, 10.1186/1472-6882-9-31, 9, 1, (2009).
  • The likelihood ratio test for non-standard hypotheses near the boundary of the null – with application to the assessment of non-inferiority, Statistics & Decisions, 10.1524/stnd.2009.1022, 27, 1, (2009).
  • Robust Designs in Noninferiority Three-Arm Clinical Trials With Presence of Heteroscedasticity, Statistics in Biopharmaceutical Research, 10.1198/sbr.2009.0021, 1, 3, (268-278), (2009).
  • Testing noninferiority in three‐armed clinical trials based on likelihood ratio statistics, Canadian Journal of Statistics, 10.1002/cjs.5550350306, 35, 3, (413-431), (2009).
  • Meaningful interpretation of clinical trials requires careful consideration of their findings, Drugs & Therapy Perspectives, 10.2165/00042310-200824030-00008, 24, 3, (23-26), (2008).
  • Non-Inferiority Test in a Two-Arm Trial and a Three-Arm Trial Including a Placebo, Korean Journal of Applied Statistics, 10.5351/KJAS.2008.21.6.947, 21, 6, (947-957), (2008).
  • Die Beurteilung der Gleichwertigkeit von Behandlungen, Methodik klinischer Studien, 10.1007/978-3-540-85136-3, (113-127), (2008).
  • The assessment of non‐inferiority in a gold standard design with censored, exponentially distributed endpoints, Statistics in Medicine, 10.1002/sim.3348, 27, 25, (5093-5110), (2008).
  • Assessing non‐inferiority of a new treatment in a three‐arm trial in the presence of heteroscedasticity, Statistics in Medicine, 10.1002/sim.3052, 27, 4, (490-503), (2007).
  • Comments on ‘Current issues in non‐inferiority trials’ by Thomas R. Fleming, Statistics in Medicine, DOI: 10.1002/sim.2855, Statistics in Medicine, 10.1002/sim.2923, 27, 3, (333-342), (2007).
  • Acupuncture for Posttraumatic Stress Disorder, The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 10.1097/NMD.0b013e31803044f8, 195, 6, (504-513), (2007).
  • How to deal with multiple treatment or dose groups in randomized clinical trials?, Fundamental & Clinical Pharmacology, 10.1111/j.1472-8206.2007.00469.x, 21, 2, (137-154), (2007).
  • The Utility of Active-Controlled Noninferiority/Equivalence Trials in Drug Development, International Journal of Pharmaceutical Medicine, 10.2165/00124363-200721030-00005, 21, 3, (225-233), (2007).
  • Non-Inferiority Trials in Surgical Oncology, Annals of Surgical Oncology, 10.1245/s10434-006-9295-2, 14, 5, (1532-1539), (2007).
  • Noninferiority Testing Beyond Simple Two-Sample Comparison∗, Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics, 10.1080/10543400601177368, 17, 2, (289-308), (2007).
  • Simultaneous Test for Superiority and Noninferiority Hypotheses in Active-Controlled Clinical Trials∗, Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics, 10.1080/10543400601177434, 17, 2, (247-257), (2007).
  • Use of the Fieller–Hinkley Distribution of the Ratio of Random Variables in Testing for Noninferiority, Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics, 10.1080/10543400601177335, 17, 2, (215-228), (2007).
  • Blinded Sample Size Reestimation in Non‐Inferiority Trials with Binary Endpoints, Biometrical Journal, 10.1002/bimj.200610373, 49, 6, (903-916), (2007).
  • An introductory note to the CHMP guidelines: choice of the non‐inferiority margin and data monitoring committees by David Brown, Peter Volkers and Simon Day, Statistics in Medicine 2006; 25:1623–1627, Statistics in Medicine, 10.1002/sim.2665, 26, 1, (230-233), (2006).
  • Planning and analysis of three‐arm non‐inferiority trials with binary endpoints, Statistics in Medicine, 10.1002/sim.2543, 26, 2, (253-273), (2006).
  • A Ratio Test in Active Control Non-Inferiority Trials with a Time-to-Event Endpoint, Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics, 10.1080/10543400500508754, 16, 2, (151-164), (2006).
  • A two‐stage sample size recalculation procedure for placebo‐ and active‐controlled non‐inferiority trials, Statistics in Medicine, 10.1002/sim.2651, 25, 19, (3396-3406), (2006).
  • New computer-intensive procedures for testing null hypotheses comparing two parameters approximately, Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems, 10.1016/j.chemolab.2005.04.014, 82, 1-2, (66-74), (2006).
  • Discussion about Points to Consider on Switching between Superiority and Non-inferiority & Guideline on the Choice of Non-inferiority Margin, Japanese Journal of Biometrics, 10.5691/jjb.27.S105, 27, Special_Issue, (S105-S115), (2006).
  • Power and sample size computations in simultaneous tests for non‐inferiority based on relative margins, Statistics in Medicine, 10.1002/sim.2359, 25, 7, (1131-1147), (2005).
  • Discussion on “Establishing Efficacy of a New Experimental Treatment in the ‘Gold Standard’ Design”, Biometrical Journal, 10.1002/bimj.200510184, 47, 6, (790-791), (2005).
  • Rejoinder to “Establishing Efficacy of a New Experimental Treatment in the ‘Gold Standard’ Design”, Biometrical Journal, 10.1002/bimj.200510179, 47, 6, (797-798), (2005).
  • On Confidence Bounds for the Ratio of Net Differences in the “Gold Standard” Design with Reference, Experimental, and Placebo Treatment, Biometrical Journal, 10.1002/bimj.200510178, 47, 6, (799-806), (2005).
  • Establishing Efficacy of a New Experimental Treatment in the ‘Gold Standard’ Design, Biometrical Journal, 10.1002/bimj.200510169, 47, 6, (782-786), (2005).
  • Testing Superiority and Non‐Inferiority Hypotheses in Active Controlled Clinical Trials, Biometrical Journal, 10.1002/bimj.200410089, 47, 1, (62-74), (2005).
  • Biostatistical Assessment of Mutagenicity Studies by Including the Positive Control, Biometrical Journal, 10.1002/bimj.200410082, 47, 1, (82-87), (2005).
  • Tests of Noninferiority via Rate Difference for Three-Arm Clinical Trials with Placebo, Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics, 10.1081/BIP-120037184, 14, 2, (337-347), (2004).
  • Placebo treatment is effective differently in different diseases — but is it also harmless? A brief synopsis, Science and Engineering Ethics, 10.1007/s11948-004-0072-y, 10, 1, (151-155), (2004).
  • Hypothesis Testing in the “Gold Standard” Design for Proving the Efficacy of an Experimental Treatment Relative to Placebo and a Reference, Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics, 10.1081/BIP-120037182, 14, 2, (315-325), (2004).

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.