当前位置: X-MOL 学术Stat. Med. › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
A framework for considering the risk‐benefit trade‐off in designing noninferiority trials using composite outcome approaches
Statistics in Medicine ( IF 2 ) Pub Date : 2020-10-26 , DOI: 10.1002/sim.8777
Grace Montepiedra 1 , Ritesh Ramchandani 1 , Sachiko Miyahara 1 , Soyeon Kim 2
Affiliation  

When a new treatment regimen is expected to have comparable or slightly worse efficacy to that of the control regimen but has benefits in other domains such as safety and tolerability, a noninferiority (NI) trial may be appropriate but is fraught with difficulty in justifying an acceptable NI margin that is based on both clinical and statistical input. To overcome this, we propose to utilize composite risk‐benefit outcomes that combine elements from domains of importance (eg, efficacy, safety, and tolerability). The composite outcome itself may be analyzed using a superiority framework, or it can be used as a tool at the design stage of a NI trial for selecting an NI margin for efficacy that balances changes in risks and benefits. In the latter case, the choice of NI margin may be based on a novel quantity called the maximum allowable decrease in efficacy (MADE), defined as the marginal difference in efficacy between arms that would yield a null treatment effect for the composite outcome given an assumed distribution for the composite outcome. We observe that MADE: (1) is larger when the safety improvement for the experimental arm is larger, (2) depends on the association between the efficacy and safety outcomes, and (3) depends on the control arm efficacy rate. We use a numerical example for power comparisons between a superiority test for the composite outcome vs a noninferiority test for efficacy using the MADE as the NI margin, and apply the methods to a TB treatment trial.

中文翻译:

在使用复合结果方法设计非劣效性试验时考虑风险-收益权衡的框架

当预期新的治疗方案与对照方案的疗效相当或略差,但在安全性和耐受性等其他领域有益处时,非劣效性 (NI) 试验可能是合适的,但很难证明可接受的治疗方案的合理性。基于临床和统计输入的 NI 裕度。为了克服这个问题,我们建议利用综合风险收益结果,结合来自重要领域(例如,有效性、安全性和耐受性)的元素。复合结果本身可以使用优效性框架进行分析,也可以在 NI 试验的设计阶段用作工具,用于选择平衡风险和收益变化的 NI 疗效边际。在后一种情况下,NI 边际的选择可能基于一个新的数量,称为最大允许疗效下降 (MADE),定义为在假定复合材料分布的情况下,对复合结果产生无效治疗效果的两组间疗效的边际差异结果。我们观察到 MADE:(1)当实验组的安全性改进较大时更大,(2)取决于疗效和安全性结果之间的关联,以及(3)取决于对照组的有效率。我们使用数值示例对复合结局的优效性检验与使用 MADE 作为 NI 边界的疗效非劣效性检验进行功效比较,并将这些方法应用于结核病治疗试验。定义为在假定复合结果的分布的情况下,对复合结果产生无效治疗效果的两组间疗效的边际差异。我们观察到 MADE:(1)当实验组的安全性改进较大时更大,(2)取决于疗效和安全性结果之间的关联,以及(3)取决于对照组的有效率。我们使用数值示例对复合结局的优效性检验与使用 MADE 作为 NI 边界的疗效非劣效性检验进行功效比较,并将这些方法应用于结核病治疗试验。定义为在假定复合结果的分布的情况下,对复合结果产生无效治疗效果的两组间疗效的边际差异。我们观察到 MADE:(1)当实验组的安全性改进较大时更大,(2)取决于疗效和安全性结果之间的关联,以及(3)取决于对照组的有效率。我们使用数值示例对复合结果的优效性检验与使用 MADE 作为 NI 边际的疗效非劣效性检验进行功效比较,并将这些方法应用于结核病治疗试验。(2) 取决于疗效和安全性结果之间的关联,以及 (3) 取决于对照组的有效率。我们使用数值示例对复合结局的优效性检验与使用 MADE 作为 NI 边界的疗效非劣效性检验进行功效比较,并将这些方法应用于结核病治疗试验。(2) 取决于疗效和安全性结果之间的关联,以及 (3) 取决于对照组的有效率。我们使用数值示例对复合结局的优效性检验与使用 MADE 作为 NI 边界的疗效非劣效性检验进行功效比较,并将这些方法应用于结核病治疗试验。
更新日期:2020-12-24
down
wechat
bug