King's College London

Research portal

Interpreting the results of noninferiority trials—a review

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

Jack Cuzick, Peter Sasieni

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1755-1759
Number of pages5
JournalBritish journal of cancer
Volume127
Issue number10
Early online date15 Sep 2022
DOIs
Accepted/In press27 Jul 2022
E-pub ahead of print15 Sep 2022
Published9 Nov 2022

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright: © 2022, The Author(s).

King's Authors

Abstract

Noninferiority trials are becoming increasing common, but are often poorly reported and misunderstood. A better understanding of the new components of a noninferiority trial and their interpretation is needed. Noninferiority trials are an extension of conventional superiority trials, which provide a basis for determining if a new treatment, which may have advantages other than efficacy, has sufficient efficacy to be useful in certain situations. A key feature is the need to specify a clinical noninferiority margin above which the lower boundary of the confidence interval for the difference between the new treatment and the conventional treatment must lie. In most cases a nontreated control arm is not included, and when the efficacy of the new treatment is less than that of the standard treatment, determining its efficacy versus no treatment can be a major challenge. Treatments meeting a clinical noninferiority requirement can be statistically significantly superior to standard treatment, of similar efficacy (i.e., no significant difference), or even significantly inferior in a conventional analysis. Noninferiority comparisons are an important addition to the reporting of clinical trials, but require prior consideration of several factors that conventional superiority analyses do not address.

View graph of relations

© 2020 King's College London | Strand | London WC2R 2LS | England | United Kingdom | Tel +44 (0)20 7836 5454