Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37626423›Full record

ArticleTrials2023

The Smooth Away From Expected (SAFE) non-inferiority frontier: theory and implementation with an application to the D3 trial.

Matteo Quartagno, Man Chan, Anna Turkova, Deborah Ford, Ian R White

Abstract readEquivalence Trial
In one paragraph

Article in Trials, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Matteo QuartagnoMRC Clinical Trials Unit, Institute for Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, 90 High Holborn, London, WC1V 6LJ, UK. m.quartagno@ucl.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4446-0730
Man ChanMRC Clinical Trials Unit, Institute for Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, 90 High Holborn, London, WC1V 6LJ, UK.
Anna TurkovaMRC Clinical Trials Unit, Institute for Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, 90 High Holborn, London, WC1V 6LJ, UK.
Deborah FordMRC Clinical Trials Unit, Institute for Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, 90 High Holborn, London, WC1V 6LJ, UK.
Ian R WhiteMRC Clinical Trials Unit, Institute for Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, 90 High Holborn, London, WC1V 6LJ, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6718-7661

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_UU_00004/03Medical Research Council MC_UU_00004/07Medical Research Council MC_UU_00004/09
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn a non-inferiority trial, the choice of margin depends on the expected control event risk. If the true risk differs from expected, power and interpretability of results can be affected. A non-inferiority frontier pre-specifies an appropriate non-inferiority margin for each value of control event risk. D3 is a non-inferiority trial comparing two treatment regimens in children living with HIV, designed assuming a control event risk of 12%, a non-inferiority margin of 10%, 80% power and a significance level (α) of 0.025. We consider approaches to choosing and implementing a frontier for this already funded trial, where changing the sample size substantially would be difficult.

methodsIn D3, we fix the non-inferiority margin at 10%, 8% and 5% for control event risks of ≥9%, 5% and 1%, respectively. We propose four frontiers which fit these fixed points, including a Smooth Away From Expected (SAFE) frontier. Analysis approaches considered are as follows: using the pre-specified significance level (α=0.025); always using a reduced significance level (to achieve α≤0.025 across control event risks); reducing significance levels only when the control event risk differs significantly from expected (control event risk <9%); and using a likelihood ratio test. We compare power and type 1 error for SAFE with other frontiers.

resultsChanging the significance level only when the control event risk is <9% achieves approximately nominal (<3%) type I error rate and maintains reasonable power for control event risks between 1 and 15%. The likelihood ratio test method performs similarly, but the results are more complex to present. Other analysis methods lead to either inflated type 1 error or badly reduced power. The SAFE frontier gives more interpretable results with low control event risks than other frontiers (i.e. it uses more reasonable non-inferiority margins). Other frontiers do not achieve power close (i.e. within 1%) to SAFE across the range of likely control event risks while controlling type I error.

conclusionsThe SAFE non-inferiority frontier will be used in D3, and the non-inferiority margin and significance level will be modified if the control event risk is lower than expected. This ensures results will remain interpretable if design assumptions are incorrect, while achieving similar power. A similar approach could be considered for other non-inferiority trials where the control event risk is uncertain.

Indexed as

Health BehaviorInsufflationChildHumansSample SizeUncertainty

Identifiers

PMID37626423
PMCPMC10464088

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.