ArticleClinical trials (London, England)2011
Some essential considerations in the design and conduct of non-inferiority trials.
Article in Clinical trials (London, England), 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
45 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 88 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Non-inferiority trials in clinical ophthalmology: a systematic review.Eye (London, England) · 2025Pooled it
- An investigation of the constancy of effect in Cochrane systematic reviews in context with the assumptions for noninferiority trials.BMC medical research methodology · 2022Pooled it
- Application of a Novel Desirability of Outcome Ranking Endpoint Incorporating a Framework for Resistance Assessment and Microbiologic Evaluation in Antibiotic Trials: A Proof-of-Concept in a Post Hoc Analysis of the BALANCE Trial.Open forum infectious diseases · 2026Trial
- Final survival analysis of induction chemotherapy with lobaplatin and fluorouracil versus cisplatin and fluorouracil followed by concurrent chemoradiotherapy in nasopharyngeal carcinoma: a multicenter, randomized, phase 3 trial.Nature communications · 2026Trial
- Technology-assisted cognitive-behavioral therapy for perinatal depression delivered by lived-experience peers: a cluster-randomized noninferiority trial.Nature medicine · 2025Trial
- Evaluating group-sequential non-inferiority clinical trials following interim stopping: The HIV Prevention Trials Network 083 trial.Clinical trials (London, England) · 2022Trial
- Probabilistic Risk-Benefit Profile of Ticagrelor Monotherapy After Short Dual Antiplatelet Therapy: A Bayesian Analysis of the ULTIMATE-DAPT Trial.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2026Article
- Self-Adapting Priors for Dynamic Borrowing in Three-Arm Non-Inferiority Trials With Pre-Specified Margin.Statistics in medicine · 2026Article
- The evolving role of placebo in non-inferiority trials: A scoping review.Clinical trials (London, England) · 2026Article
- How can non-inferiority studies with mortality end points be ethically justified?Journal of medical ethics · 2026Article
- A General Framework for Designing and Evaluating Active-Controlled Trials with Non-Inferiority Objectives.Statistics in medicine · 2026Article
- Choose-NI-metric: a shiny application for converting and comparing non-inferiority metrics in binary endpoint trials.BMC medical research methodology · 2026Article
- A Perspective on the Appropriate Implementation of ICH E9(R1) Addendum Strategies for Handling Intercurrent Events.Statistics in medicine · 2025Article
- SPIRIT 2025 explanation and elaboration: updated guideline for protocols of randomised trials.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2025Article
- Active-Controlled Trial Design for HIV Prevention Trials With a Counterfactual Placebo.Statistics in medicine · 2025Article
- Exploring different objectives in non-inferiority trials.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2024Article
- Generalizing the intention-to-treat effect of an active control from historical placebo-controlled trials: A case study of the efficacy of daily oral TDF/FTC in the HPTN 084 study.Journal of the American Statistical Association · 2024Article
- Study design approaches for future active-controlled HIV prevention trials.Statistical communications in infectious diseases · 2024Article
- COVID-19 vaccine trials: The potential for "hybrid" analyses.Clinical trials (London, England) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSuppose a standard therapy (Standard) has been established to provide a clinically important reduction in risk of irreversible morbidity or mortality. In that setting, the safety and efficacy of an experimental intervention likely would be assessed in a clinical trial providing a comparison with Standard rather than a placebo arm. Such a trial often is designed to assess whether the efficacy of the experimental intervention is not unacceptably worse than that of Standard, and is called a non-inferiority trial. Formally, the non-inferiority trial usually is designed to rule out a non-inferiority margin, defined as the minimum threshold for what would constitute an unacceptable loss of efficacy. PURPOSE: Even though the literature has many important articles identifying various approaches to the design and conduct of non-inferiority trials, confusion remains especially regarding key considerations for selecting the non-inferiority margin. The purpose of this article is to provide improved clarity regarding these considerations.
methodsWe present scientific insights into many factors that should be addressed in the design and conduct of non-inferiority trials to enhance their integrity and reliability, and provide motivation for key considerations that guide the selection of non-inferiority margins. We also provide illustrations and insights from recent experiences.
resultsTwo considerations are essential, and should be addressed in separate steps, in the formulation of the non-inferiority margin. First, the margin should be formulated using adjustments to account for bias or lack of reliability in the estimate of the effect of Standard in the non-inferiority trial setting. Second, the non-inferiority margin should be formulated to achieve preservation of an appropriate percentage of the effect of Standard. LIMITATIONS: The considerations, in particular regarding the importance of preservation of effect, might not apply to settings where it would be ethical as well as clinically relevant to include both Standard and placebo arms in the trial for direct comparisons with the experimental intervention arm.
conclusionsNon-inferiority trials with non-rigorous margins allow substantial risk for accepting inadequately effective experimental regimens, leading to the risk of erosion in quality of health care. The design and conduct of non-inferiority trials, including selection of non-inferiority margins, should account for many factors that can induce bias in the estimated effect of Standard in the non-inferiority trial and thus lead to bias in the estimated effect of the experimental treatment, for the need to ensure the experimental treatment preserves a clinically acceptable fraction of Standard's effect, and for the particular vulnerability of the integrity of a non-inferiority trial to the irregularities in trial conduct. Due to the inherent uncertainties in non-inferiority trials, alternative designs should be pursued whenever possible.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.