Assessing non-inferiority of a new treatment in a three-arm trial in the presence of heteroscedasticity

Statistics in Medicine

Volumn 27, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 490-503

  Hasler, Mario ^a   Vonk, Richardus ^b   Hothorn, Ludwig A ^a  

^a LEIBNIZ UNIVERSITY HANNOVER   (Germany)

^b BAYER PHARMA AG   (Germany)

Author keywords

Fieller's condifence interval; Heteroscedasticity; Non inferiority; Optimal allocation; Three arm trial

Indexed keywords

CYCLOPHOSPHAMIDE; HYDROQUINONE;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ANIMAL CELL; ARTICLE; CHROMOSOME DAMAGE; CLINICAL RESEARCH; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; HUMAN; LUNG MODEL; LUNG VENTILATION DISTRIBUTION; MATHEMATICAL COMPUTING; NONHUMAN; NORMAL DISTRIBUTION; OXYGEN TENSION; POWER ANALYSIS; POWER OF A TEST; PROBABILITY; SAMPLE SIZE; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL CONCEPTS; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; STUDENT T TEST; THREE ARM STATISTICAL DESIGN; TOXICOLOGY;

ANIMALS; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; DRUG EVALUATION, PRECLINICAL; HUMANS; HYDROQUINONES; MICRONUCLEUS TESTS; MODELS, STATISTICAL; PLACEBOS; RANDOM ALLOCATION; TOXICOLOGY; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 39449129871     PISSN: 02776715     EISSN: 10970258     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sim.3052     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. D'Agostino RB, Massaro JM, Sullivan LM. Non-inferiority trials: design concepts and issues - the encounters of academic consultants in statistics. Statistics in Medicine 2003; 22:169-186.
2. Munk A, Trampisch HJ. Therapeutic equivalence - clinical issues and statistical methodology in noninferiority trials. Biometrical Journal 2005; 47:7-9.
3. CPMP Concept Paper on the development of a Committee for Proprietary Medicinal Products (CPMP). Points to consider on biostatistical/ methodological issues arising from recent CPMP discussions on licensing applications: choice of delta. Available at: http://www.einea.eu.int/ pdfs/human/ewp/215899en.pdf, 1999.
4. Lange S, Freitag G. Choice of delta: requirements and reality - results of a systematic review. Biometrical Journal 2005; 47:12-27.
5. Pigeot I, Schäfer J, Röhmel J, Hauschke D. Assessing non-inferiority of a new treatment in a three-arm clinical trial including a placebo. Statistics in Medicine 2003; 22:883-899.
6. Silva-Costa-Gomes T, Gallart L, Valles J, Trillo L, Minguella J, Puig MM. Low- vs. high-dose almitrine combined with nitric oxide to prevent hydroxia during open-chest one-lung ventilation. British Journal of Anaesthesia 2005; 95(3):410-416.
7. Hauschke D, Slacik-Erben R, Hensen S, Kaufmann R. Biostatistical assessment of mutagenicity studies by including the positive control. Biometrical Journal 2005; 47:82-87.
8. Adler ID, Kliesch U. Comparison of single and multiple treatment regiments in the mouse bone marrow micronucleus assay for hydroquinone and cyclophosphamide. Mutation Research 1990; 234:115-123.
9. Hauschke D, Pigeot I. Establishing efficacy of a new experimental treatment in the 'Gold Standard' design. Biometrical Journal 2005; 47:782-786.
10. Schäfer J. Kriterien zur Entscheidung über therapeutische Aequivalenz. Diploma Thesis, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, 2001.
11. Welch BL. The significance of the difference between two means when the population variances are unequal. Biometrika 1938; 29:350-362.
12. R Development Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing: Vienna, Austria, 2006. ISBN: 3-900051-07-0, http://www.R-project.org.
13. Fieller EC. Some problems in interval estimation. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B 1954; 16:175-185.
14. Singer J. A simple procedure to compute the sample size needed to compare two independent groups when the population variances are unequal. Statistics in Medicine 2001; 20:1089-1095.
15. Thöni H. Optimale Aufteilung des Stichprobenumfangs zum Vergleich von s Standard- mit t Testbehandlungen. EDV in Medizin und Biologie 1983; 14:95-97.
16. Schwartz TA, Denne JS. A two-stage sample size recalculation procedure for placebo- and active-controlled non-inferiority trials. Statistics in Medicine 2006; 25:3396-3406.
17. Hothorn LA, Hauschke D. Identifying the maximum safe dose: a multiple testing approach. Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics 2000; 10:15-30.
18. Hsu JC, Berger RL. Stepwise confidence intervals without multiplicity adjustment for dose-response, multiple endpoints, and toxicity studies. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1999; 94(446):468-482.
19. Hung HMJ, Wang SJ, O'Neill R. A regulatory perspective on choice of margin and statistical inference issue in non-inferiority trials. Biometrical Journal 2005; 47:28-36.