Methods of defining the non-inferiority margin in randomized, double-blind controlled trials: a systematic review
نویسندگان
چکیده
BACKGROUND There is no consensus on the preferred method for defining the non-inferiority margin in non-inferiority trials, and previous studies showed that the rationale for its choice is often not reported. This study investigated how the non-inferiority margin is defined in the published literature, and whether its reporting has changed over time. METHODS A systematic PubMed search was conducted for all published randomized, double-blind, non-inferiority trials from January 1, 1966, to February 6, 2015. The primary outcome was the number of margins that were defined by methods other than the historical evidence of the active comparator. This was evaluated for a time trend. We also assessed the under-reporting of the methods of defining the margin as a secondary outcome, and whether this changed over time. Both outcomes were analyzed using a Poisson log-linear model. Predictors for better reporting of the methods, and the use of the fixed-margin method (one of the historical evidence methods) were also analyzed using logistic regression. RESULTS Two hundred seventy-three articles were included, which account for 273 non-inferiority margins. There was no statistically significant difference in the number of margins that were defined by other methods compared to those defined based on the historical evidence (ratio 2.17, 95% CI 0.86 to 5.82, p = 0.11), and this did not change over time. The number of margins for which methods were unreported was similar to those with reported methods (ratio 1.35, 95% CI 0.76 to 2.43, p = 0.31), with no change over time. The method of defining the margin was less often reported in journals with low-impact factors compared to journals with high-impact factors (OR 0.20; 95% CI 0.10 to 0.37, p < 0.0001). The publication of the FDA draft guidance in 2010 was associated with increased reporting of the fixed-margin method (after versus before 2010) (OR 3.54; 95% CI 1.12 to 13.35, p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS Non-inferiority margins are not commonly defined based on the historical evidence of the active comparator, and they are poorly reported. Authors, reviewers, and editors need to take notice of reporting this critical information to allow for better judgment of non-inferiority trials.
منابع مشابه
Challenges of defining a non-inferiority margin: a case study of non-inferiority randomized controlled trials of oral anti-thrombolytic agents for prophylaxis of venous thromboembolic events after orthopedic surgery
Methods We searched in Pubmed and Cochrane-central-registerfor-controlled-trials for all NI RCTs of direct thrombin inhibitors (DTI) and direct inhibitors of factor Xa (DXAI) for prophylaxis of VTE. All NI trials had enoxaparin as their active comparator. Using the draft FDA guidelines for NI trials, we determined an NI margin, referred to as the reference NI margin, based on all published plac...
متن کاملHomeopathic Individualized Q-Potencies versus Fluoxetine for Moderate to Severe Depression: Double-Blind, Randomized Non-Inferiority Trial
Homeopathy is a complementary and integrative medicine used in depression, The aim of this study is to investigate the non-inferiority and tolerability of individualized homeopathic medicines [Quinquagintamillesmial (Q-potencies)] in acute depression, using fluoxetine as active control. Ninety-one outpatients with moderate to severe depression were assigned to receive an individualized homeopat...
متن کاملThe Effect of Fennel on Pain Relief in Primary Dysmenorrhea: A Systematic Review of Clinical Trials
Background and aims: Fennel is often advocated for primary dysmenorrhea. Whether this herb has areal effect on pain relief is still a matter of debate in medicine. Therefore, this study was conducted toevaluate the effect of fennel on primary dysmenorrhea.Methods: This systematic review was conducted on clinical trials (non-randomized, randomized,historical study with co...
متن کاملA Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Comparing the Safety of Dapagliflozin in Type 1 Diabetes Patients
Background and Purpose: The dapagliflozin’s safety profile in insulin-treated adult type-1 diabetes mellites (T1DM) patients remains poorly explored. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis compared the risk of all-cause side effects, study discontinuation of participants due to side effects, urinary tract infection (UTI), diabetic ketoacidosis, and hypoglycemia between dapagliflozi...
متن کاملThe effect of quercetin on stress The Effect of Quercetin on Stress Oxidative Markers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Clinical Trialsers; A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled clinical trials
Background: Quercetin is one of the main flavonoids, overall distributed in plants. The antioxidant capacity of quercetin is several times vitamin E and glutathione. This systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials were performed to determine the effect of quercetin on oxidative stress (OS) markers. Methods: A literature search was conducted in PubMed, ISI Web of Science...
متن کامل