IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/csdana/v132y2019icp70-83.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Non-inferiority testing for risk ratio, odds ratio and number needed to treat in three-arm trial

Author

Listed:
  • Chowdhury, Shrabanti
  • Tiwari, Ram C.
  • Ghosh, Samiran

Abstract

Three-arm non-inferiority (NI) trial including the experimental treatment, an active reference treatment, and a placebo where the outcome of interest is binary are considered. While the risk difference (RD) is the most common and well explored functional form for testing efficacy (or effectiveness), however, recent FDA guideline suggested measures such as relative risk (RR), odds ratio (OR), number needed to treat (NNT) among others, on the basis of which NI can be claimed for binary outcome. Albeit, developing test based on these different functions of binary outcome are challenging. This is because the construction and interpretation of NI margin for such functions are non-trivial extensions of RD based approach. A Frequentist test based on traditional fraction margin approach for RR, OR and NNT are proposed first. Furthermore a conditional testing approach is developed by incorporating assay sensitivity (AS) condition directly into NI testing. A detailed discussion of sample size/power calculation are also put forward which could be readily used while designing such trials in practice. A clinical trial data is reanalyzed to demonstrate the presented approach.

Suggested Citation

  • Chowdhury, Shrabanti & Tiwari, Ram C. & Ghosh, Samiran, 2019. "Non-inferiority testing for risk ratio, odds ratio and number needed to treat in three-arm trial," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 70-83.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:csdana:v:132:y:2019:i:c:p:70-83
    DOI: 10.1016/j.csda.2018.08.018
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167947318302019
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.csda.2018.08.018?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Boris G. Zaslavsky, 2013. "Bayesian Hypothesis Testing in Two-Arm Trials with Dichotomous Outcomes," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 69(1), pages 157-163, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Stavros Nikolakopoulos & Ingeborg van der Tweel & Kit C. B. Roes, 2018. "Dynamic borrowing through empirical power priors that control type I error," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 74(3), pages 874-880, September.
    2. Akiyoshi Matsugi & Naoki Yoshida & Satoru Nishishita & Yohei Okada & Nobuhiko Mori & Kosuke Oku & Shinya Douchi & Koichi Hosomi & Youichi Saitoh, 2019. "Cerebellum-mediated trainability of eye and head movements for dynamic gazing," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(11), pages 1-15, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:csdana:v:132:y:2019:i:c:p:70-83. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/csda .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.