Sample Size Estimation for Non-Inferiority Trials: Frequentist Approach versus Decision Theory Approach

A C Bouman, A J ten Cate-Hoek, B L T Ramaekers, M A Joore, A C Bouman, A J ten Cate-Hoek, B L T Ramaekers, M A Joore

Abstract

Background: Non-inferiority trials are performed when the main therapeutic effect of the new therapy is expected to be not unacceptably worse than that of the standard therapy, and the new therapy is expected to have advantages over the standard therapy in costs or other (health) consequences. These advantages however are not included in the classic frequentist approach of sample size calculation for non-inferiority trials. In contrast, the decision theory approach of sample size calculation does include these factors. The objective of this study is to compare the conceptual and practical aspects of the frequentist approach and decision theory approach of sample size calculation for non-inferiority trials, thereby demonstrating that the decision theory approach is more appropriate for sample size calculation of non-inferiority trials.

Methods: The frequentist approach and decision theory approach of sample size calculation for non-inferiority trials are compared and applied to a case of a non-inferiority trial on individually tailored duration of elastic compression stocking therapy compared to two years elastic compression stocking therapy for the prevention of post thrombotic syndrome after deep vein thrombosis.

Results: The two approaches differ substantially in conceptual background, analytical approach, and input requirements. The sample size calculated according to the frequentist approach yielded 788 patients, using a power of 80% and a one-sided significance level of 5%. The decision theory approach indicated that the optimal sample size was 500 patients, with a net value of €92 million.

Conclusions: This study demonstrates and explains the differences between the classic frequentist approach and the decision theory approach of sample size calculation for non-inferiority trials. We argue that the decision theory approach of sample size estimation is most suitable for sample size calculation of non-inferiority trials.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Fig 1. Formula Box 1.
Fig 1. Formula Box 1.
Fig 2. Formula Box 2.
Fig 2. Formula Box 2.
Fig 3. Calculations Box 1.
Fig 3. Calculations Box 1.
Fig 4. Results Value of information analyses.
Fig 4. Results Value of information analyses.
A)EVPI, B)EVPPI, C)EVSI and ENBS.

References

    1. Julious SA, Owen RJ (2011) A comparison of methods for sample size estimation for non-inferiority studies with binary outcomes. Stat Methods Med Res 20: 595–612. 10.1177/0962280210378945
    1. Soonawala D, Middelburg RA, Egger M, Vandenbroucke JP, Dekkers OM (2010) Efficacy of experimental treatments compared with standard treatments in non-inferiority trials: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Int J Epidemiol 39: 1567–1581. 10.1093/ije/dyq136
    1. Schumi J, Wittes JT (2011) Through the looking glass: understanding non-inferiority. Trials 12: 106 10.1186/1745-6215-12-106
    1. Laster LL, Johnson MF, Kotler ML (2006) Non-inferiority trials: the 'at least as good as' criterion with dichotomous data. Stat Med 25: 1115–1130.
    1. Laster LL, Johnson MF (2003) Non-inferiority trials: the 'at least as good as' criterion. Stat Med 22: 187–200.
    1. Blackwelder WC (1982) "Proving the null hypothesis" in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 3: 345–353.
    1. (2006) Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) guideline on the choice of the non-inferiority margin. Stat Med 25: 1628–1638.
    1. Rothmann MD, Tsou HH (2003) On non-inferiority analysis based on delta-method confidence intervals. J Biopharm Stat 13: 565–583.
    1. Eckermann S, Willan AR (2007) Expected value of information and decision making in HTA. Health Econ 16: 195–209.
    1. Briggs A, Claxton K, Sculpher M (2006) Efficient research design In: Press OU, editor. Decision Modelling for Health Economic Evaluation. Oxford.
    1. Ades AE, Lu G, Claxton K (2004) Expected value of sample information calculations in medical decision modeling. Med Decis Making 24: 207–227.
    1. Claxton K, Posnett J (1996) An economic approach to clinical trial design and research priority-setting. Health Econ 5: 513–524.
    1. Detsky AS (1985) Using economic analysis to determine the resource consequences of choices made in planning clinical trials. J Chronic Dis 38: 753–765.
    1. Lindley DV (1997) The choice of sample size. Statistician: 129–138.
    1. Groot Koerkamp B, Nikken JJ, Oei EH, Stijnen T, Ginai AZ, Hunink MG (2008) Value of information analysis used to determine the necessity of additional research: MR imaging in acute knee trauma as an example. Radiology 246: 420–425. 10.1148/radiol.2462070093
    1. Grutters JP, Abrams KR, de Ruysscher D, Pijls-Johannesma M, Peters HJ, Beutner E, et al. (2011) When to wait for more evidence? Real options analysis in proton therapy. Oncologist 16: 1752–1761. 10.1634/theoncologist.2011-0029
    1. Kent S, Briggs A, Eckermann S, Berry C (2013) Are value of information methods ready for prime time? An application to alternative treatment strategies for NSTEMI patients. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 29: 435–442. 10.1017/S0266462313000433
    1. Koerkamp BG, Spronk S, Stijnen T, Hunink MG (2010) Value of information analyses of economic randomized controlled trials: the treatment of intermittent claudication. Value Health 13: 242–250. 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2009.00656.x
    1. McKenna C, Claxton K (2011) Addressing adoption and research design decisions simultaneously: the role of value of sample information analysis. Med Decis Making 31: 853–865. 10.1177/0272989X11399921
    1. Retel VP, Grutters JP, van Harten WH, Joore MA (2013) Value of research and value of development in early assessments of new medical technologies. Value Health 16: 720–728. 10.1016/j.jval.2013.04.013
    1. Thariani R, Henry NL, Ramsey SD, Blough DK, Barlow B, Gralow JR, et al. (2013) Is a comparative clinical trial for breast cancer tumor markers to monitor disease recurrence warranted? A value of information analysis. J Comp Eff Res 2: 325–334. 10.2217/cer.13.15
    1. Welton NJ, Madan J, Ades AE (2011) Are head-to-head trials of biologics needed? The role of value of information methods in arthritis research. Rheumatology (Oxford) 50 Suppl 4: iv19–25.
    1. Willan AR (2007) Clinical decision making and the expected value of information. Clin Trials 4: 279–285.
    1. Buxton MJ (2006) Economic evaluation and decision making in the UK. Pharmacoeconomics 24: 1133–1142.
    1. Brandjes DP, Buller HR, Heijboer H, Huisman MV, de Rijk M, Jagt H, et al. (1997) Randomised trial of effect of compression stockings in patients with symptomatic proximal-vein thrombosis. Lancet 349: 759–762.
    1. Prandoni P, Lensing AW, Prins MH, Frulla M, Marchiori A, Bernardi E, et al. (2004) Below-knee elastic compression stockings to prevent the post-thrombotic syndrome: a randomized, controlled trial. Ann Intern Med 141: 249–256.
    1. Kahn SR, Shbaklo H, Lamping DL, Holcroft CA, Shrier I, Miron MJ, et al. (2008) Determinants of health-related quality of life during the 2 years following deep vein thrombosis. J Thromb Haemost 6: 1105–1112. 10.1111/j.1538-7836.2008.03002.x
    1. MacDougall DA, Feliu AL, Boccuzzi SJ, Lin J (2006) Economic burden of deep-vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, and post-thrombotic syndrome. Am J Health Syst Pharm 63: S5–15.
    1. Naess IA, Christiansen SC, Romundstad P, Cannegieter SC, Rosendaal FR, Hammerstrom J (2007) Incidence and mortality of venous thrombosis: a population-based study. J Thromb Haemost 5: 692–699.
    1. Gelderblom GJ, Hagedoorn-Meuwissen EAV (2005) Kousen uittrekhulpmiddel Easy-Lever. Een onderzoek naar bruikbaarheid, effecten en belemmeringen, in opdracht van ZonMw.
    1. Blattler W (1999) Aspects of cost effectiveness in therapy of acute leg/pelvic vein thrombosis. Wien Med Wochenschr 149: 61–65.
    1. Kahn SR, Shrier I, Julian JA, Ducruet T, Arsenault L, Miron MJ, et al. (2008) Determinants and time course of the postthrombotic syndrome after acute deep venous thrombosis. Ann Intern Med 149: 698–707.
    1. Ten Cate-Hoek AJ, Ten Cate H, Tordoir J, Hamulyak K, Prins MH (2010) Individually tailored duration of elastic compression therapy in relation to incidence of the postthrombotic syndrome. J Vasc Surg 52: 132–138. 10.1016/j.jvs.2010.01.089
    1. Ten Cate-Hoek AJ, Bouman AC, Joore MA, Prins M, Ten Cate H (2014) The IDEAL DVT study, individualised duration elastic compression therapy against long-term duration of therapy for the prevention of post-thrombotic syndrome: protocol of a randomised controlled trial. BMJ Open.
    1. Buller HR, Cohen AT, Davidson B, Decousus H, Gallus AS, Gent M, et al. (2007) Idraparinux versus standard therapy for venous thromboembolic disease. N Engl J Med 357: 1094–1104.
    1. Buller HR, Gallus AS, Pillion G, Prins MH, Raskob GE (2012) Enoxaparin followed by once-weekly idrabiotaparinux versus enoxaparin plus warfarin for patients with acute symptomatic pulmonary embolism: a randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, non-inferiority trial. Lancet 379: 123–129. 10.1016/S0140-6736(11)61505-5
    1. Schulman S, Kearon C, Kakkar AK, Schellong S, Eriksson H, Baanstra D, et al. (2013) Extended use of dabigatran, warfarin, or placebo in venous thromboembolism. N Engl J Med 368: 709–718. 10.1056/NEJMoa1113697
    1. Oostenbrink JB, Koopmanschap MA, Rutten FF (2002) Standardisation of costs: the Dutch Manual for Costing in economic evaluations. Pharmacoeconomics 20: 443–454.
    1. Casparie AF, van Hout BA, Simoons ML (1998) [Guidelines and costs]. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 142: 2075–2077.
    1. Claxton K, Griffin S, Koffijberg H, McKenna C (2013) Expected health benefits of additional evidence: Principles, methods and applications. CHE Research Paper 83. Centre for Health Economics.
    1. Krahn M, Naglie G (2008) The next step in guideline development: incorporating patient preferences. JAMA 300: 436–438. 10.1001/jama.300.4.436
    1. Boivin A, Currie K, Fervers B, Gracia J, James M, Marshall C, et al. (2010) Patient and public involvement in clinical guidelines: international experiences and future perspectives. Qual Saf Health Care 19: e22 10.1136/qshc.2008.031823
    1. Eddy DM, Hollingworth W, Caro JJ, Tsevat J, McDonald KM, Wong JB (2012) Model transparency and validation: a report of the ISPOR-SMDM Modeling Good Research Practices Task Force—7. Value Health 15: 843–850. 10.1016/j.jval.2012.04.012
    1. Briggs AH, Weinstein MC, Fenwick EA, Karnon J, Sculpher MJ, Paltiel AD (2012) Model parameter estimation and uncertainty: a report of the ISPOR-SMDM Modeling Good Research Practices Task Force—6. Value Health 15: 835–842. 10.1016/j.jval.2012.04.014
    1. Smith RD, Richardson J (2005) Can we estimate the 'social' value of a QALY? Four core issues to resolve. Health Policy 74: 77–84.
    1. Caprini JA, Botteman MF, Stephens JM, Nadipelli V, Ewing MM, Brandt S, et al. (2003) Economic burden of long-term complications of deep vein thrombosis after total hip replacement surgery in the United States. Value Health 6: 59–74.
    1. Ramacciotti E, Gomes M, de Aguiar ET, Caiafa JS, de Moura LK, Araujo GR, et al. (2006) A cost analysis of the treatment of patients with post-thrombotic syndrome in Brazil. Thromb Res 118: 699–704.
    1. Ten Cate-Hoek AJ, Toll DB, Buller HR, Hoes AW, Moons KG, Oudega R, et al. (2009) Cost-effectiveness of ruling out deep venous thrombosis in primary care versus care as usual. J Thromb Haemost 7: 2042–2049. 10.1111/j.1538-7836.2009.03627.x
    1. Cv Zorgverzekeringen (2004) Handleiding voor kostenonderzoek. Methoden en standaard kostprijzen voor economische evaluaties in de gezondheidszorg: College voor zorgverzekeringen.
    1. Kind P, Hardman G, Macran S (1999) UK Population Norms for EQ-5D Discussion paper 172. Centre for Health Economics The University of York.
    1. Sullivan PW, Slejko JF, Sculpher MJ, Ghushchyan V (2011) Catalogue of EQ-5D scores for the United Kingdom. Med Decis Making 31: 800–804. 10.1177/0272989X11401031
    1. Roberts M, Russell LB, Paltiel AD, Chambers M, McEwan P, Krahn M (2012) Conceptualizing a model: a report of the ISPOR-SMDM Modeling Good Research Practices Task Force—2. Value Health 15: 804–811. 10.1016/j.jval.2012.06.016

Source: PubMed

Sponsoren und Mitarbeiter

Krankheiten

Drogeninterventionen

3
Abonnieren