Proving non-inferiority or equivalence of two treatments with dichotomous endpoints using exact methods

被引:43
作者
Chan, ISF [1 ]
机构
[1] Merck Res Labs, Clin Biostat, West Point, PA 19486 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1191/0962280203sm314ra
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Since the early work of RA Fisher, exact methods have been recognized as important tools in data analysis because they provide valid statistical inference even with small sample sizes, or with sparse or skewed data. With the recent advance of computational power and the availability of commercial software packages, exact methods have gained substantial popularity over the past two decades. However, most of these exact methods have been devoted to testing classical null hypotheses of no differences, and until recently little was known about exact methods dealing with non-inferiority or equivalence hypotheses. The presence of nuisance parameters in testing non-inferiority/equivalence hypotheses presents a special challenge for exact methods because of the intense computational requirement. In this paper, we review exact methods available for proving non-inferiority or equivalence of two treatments with a dichotomous endpoint. First, we present the general methodology for conducting exact tests for non-inferiority or equivalence; we then discuss several unconditional and conditional methods available for constructing hypothesis tests and confidence intervals based on three commonly used measures, namely, the difference, relative risk, and odds ratio of two independent proportions or rates. Finally, we illustrate with several examples the application of these exact methods in analysing and planning non-inferiority or equivalence trials.
引用
收藏
页码:37 / 58
页数:22
相关论文
共 93 条
[71]  
Rohmel J, 1998, STAT MED, V17, P1703
[72]   SMALL-SAMPLE CONFIDENCE-INTERVALS FOR P1-P2 AND P1-P2 IN 2X2 CONTINGENCY-TABLES [J].
SANTNER, TJ ;
SNELL, MK .
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN STATISTICAL ASSOCIATION, 1980, 75 (370) :386-394
[73]   INVARIANT SMALL SAMPLE CONFIDENCE-INTERVALS FOR THE DIFFERENCE OF 2 SUCCESS PROBABILITIES [J].
SANTNER, TJ ;
YAMAGAMI, S .
COMMUNICATIONS IN STATISTICS-SIMULATION AND COMPUTATION, 1993, 22 (01) :33-59
[74]   A COMPARISON OF THE 2 ONE-SIDED TESTS PROCEDURE AND THE POWER APPROACH FOR ASSESSING THE EQUIVALENCE OF AVERAGE BIOAVAILABILITY [J].
SCHUIRMANN, DJ .
JOURNAL OF PHARMACOKINETICS AND BIOPHARMACEUTICS, 1987, 15 (06) :657-680
[75]  
SOMS AP, 1989, COMMUN STAT-SIMUL C, V18, P1343
[76]   EXACT CONFIDENCE-INTERVALS, BASED ON THE Z-STATISTIC, FOR THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN 2 PROPORTIONS [J].
SOMS, AP .
COMMUNICATIONS IN STATISTICS-SIMULATION AND COMPUTATION, 1989, 18 (04) :1325-1341
[77]   EXACT PROPERTIES OF SOME EXACT TEST STATISTICS FOR COMPARING 2 BINOMIAL PROPORTIONS [J].
STORER, BE ;
KIM, C .
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN STATISTICAL ASSOCIATION, 1990, 85 (409) :146-155
[78]   EXACT UNCONDITIONAL SAMPLE SIZES FOR THE 2X2 BINOMIAL TRIAL [J].
SUISSA, S ;
SHUSTER, JJ .
JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL STATISTICAL SOCIETY SERIES A-STATISTICS IN SOCIETY, 1985, 148 :317-327
[79]  
TANG NS, IN PRESS STAT MED
[80]  
Tango T, 1998, STAT MED, V17, P891, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19980430)17:8<891::AID-SIM780>3.0.CO