A systematic review of noninferiority margins in oncology clinical trials
Publication: Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research
Abstract
Aim: A systematic literature review was conducted to identify and characterize noninferiority margins for relevant end points in oncology clinical trials. Materials & methods: Randomized, controlled, noninferiority trials of patients with cancer were identified in PubMed and Embase. Results: Of 2284 publications identified, 285 oncology noninferiority clinical trials were analyzed. The median noninferiority margin was a hazard ratio of 1.29 (mean: 1.32; range: 1.05–2.05) for studies that reported time-to-event end points (n = 192). The median noninferiority margin was 13.0% (mean: 12.7%; range: 5.0–20.0%) for studies that reported response end points as absolute rate differences (n = 31). Conclusion: Although there was consistency in the noninferiority margins’ scale, variability was evident in noninferiority margins across trials. Increased transparency may improve consistency in noninferiority margin application in oncology clinical trials.
Supplementary Material
File (suppl_file.zip)
- Download
- 243.71 KB
References
Papers of special note have been highlighted as: •• of considerable interest
1.
Fleming TR, Odem-Davis K, Rothmann MD, Li Shen Y. Some essential considerations in the design and conduct of non-inferiority trials. Clin. Trials 8(4), 432–439 (2011).
2.
Althunian TA, de Boer A, Groenwold RHH, Klungel OH. Defining the noninferiority margin and analysing noninferiority: an overview. Br. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 83(8), 1636–1642 (2017).
3.
US Food and Drug Administration. Guidance Document: Non-Inferiority Clinical Trials to Establish Effectiveness.(2016). www.fda.gov/media/78504/download
•• US FDA’s regulatory document includes guidelines on different aspects of noninferiority trial design.
4.
European Medicines Agency. Guideline on the choice of the non-inferiority margin. [Online] Committee For Medicinal Products For Human Use (CHMP) (2005). www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/scientific-guideline/guideline-choice-non-inferiority-margin_en.pdf
•• European Medicines Agency’s regulatory document includes guidelines on selection of noninferiority margins.
5.
Jung SH. Design of Phase II non-inferiority trials. Contemp. Clin. Trials Commun. 7, 23–27 (2017).
6.
Introduction to Statistical Methods for Clinical Trials. Cook TD, De Mets DL (Eds). Chapman & Hall/CRC, FL, USA (2008).
7.
Tanaka S, Kinjo Y, Kataoka Y, Yoshimura K, Teramukai S. Statistical issues and recommendations for noninferiority trials in oncology: a systematic review. Clin. Cancer Res. 18(7), 1837–1847 (2012).
•• This literature review focused on the design and quality of oncology noninferiority clinical trial, with special emphasis on methodological issues.
8.
Riechelmann RP, Alex A, Cruz L, Bariani GM, Hoff PM. Non-inferiority cancer clinical trials: scope and purposes underlying their design. Ann. Oncol. 24(7), 1942–1947 (2013).
•• This systematic literature review evaluated the purpose underlying selection of noninferiority design and size of the noninferiority margin in oncology trials.
9.
Saad ED, Buyse M. Non-inferiority trials in breast and non-small cell lung cancer: choice of non-inferiority margins and other statistical aspects. Acta Oncol. 51(7), 890–896 (2012).
•• This review assessed the design features of oncology noninferiority clinical trials with regard to the justification of noninferiority margins.
10.
Rehal S, Morris TP, Fielding K, Carpenter JR, Phillips PP. Non-inferiority trials: are they inferior? A systematic review of reporting in major medical journals. BMJ Open 6(10), e012594 (2016).
11.
Althunian TA, de Boer A, Klungel OH, Insani WN, Groenwold RH. Methods of defining the non-inferiority margin in randomized, double-blind controlled trials: a systematic review. Trials 18(1), 107 (2017).
12.
Gyawali B, Tessema FA, Jung EH, Kesselheim AS. Assessing the justification, funding, success, and survival outcomes of randomized noninferiority trials of cancer drugs: a systematic review and pooled analysis. JAMA Netw. Open 2(8), e199570 (2019).
13.
Paesmans M, Grigoriu B, Ocak S et al. Systematic qualitative review of randomised trials conducted in nonsmall cell lung cancer with a noninferiority or equivalence design. Eur. Respir. J. 45(2), 511–524 (2015).
14.
Piaggio G, Elbourne DR, Altman DG, Pocock SJ, Evans SJ. Group C. Reporting of noninferiority and equivalence randomized trials: an extension of the CONSORT statement. JAMA 295(10), 1152–1160 (2006).
15.
US Food and Drug Administration. Guidance for industry non-inferiority clinical trials draft guidance (2010). www.fdanews.com/ext/resources/files/archives/n/NoninferiorityGuidance.pdf
16.
Piaggio G, Elbourne DR, Pocock SJ, Evans SJ, Altman DG. Group C. Reporting of noninferiority and equivalence randomized trials: extension of the CONSORT 2010 statement. JAMA 308(24), 2594–2604 (2012).
17.
HonOrio HM, Wang L, Rios D. Non-inferiority clinical trials: importance and applications in health sciences. Braz. Oral Res. 34(Suppl. 2), e072 (2020).
18.
Donken R, de Melker HE, Rots NY, Berbers G, Knol MJ. Comparing vaccines: a systematic review of the use of the non-inferiority margin in vaccine trials. Vaccine 33(12), 1426–1432 (2015).
19.
Bai AD, Komorowski AS, Lo CKL et al. Methodological and reporting quality of non-inferiority randomized controlled trials comparing antibiotic therapies: a systematic review. Clin. Infect. Dis. ciaa1353 (2020).
20.
Hashim M, He J, Hu P et al. Is there a consensus regarding clinically relevant non-inferiority margins used for key oncology endpoints in non-inferiority oncology trials? Value Health 21(Suppl. 1), S228 (2018).
21.
Mateos MV, San-Miguel J, Goldschmidt H et al. The effects of different schedules of bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who are transplant ineligible: a matching-adjusted indirect comparison. Leuk. Lymphoma 61(3), 680–690 (2020).
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Pages: 443 - 455
PubMed: 33728935
Copyright
© 2021 Future Medicine Ltd.
History
Received: 14 September 2020
Accepted: 29 January 2021
Published online: 17 March 2021
Keywords:
Topics
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Article Usage
Article usage data only available from February 2023. Historical article usage data, showing the number of article downloads, is available upon request.
Citations
How to Cite
A systematic review of noninferiority margins in oncology clinical trials. (2021) Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research. DOI: 10.2217/cer-2020-0200
Export citation
Select the citation format you wish to export for this article or chapter.
Citing Literature
- Nick J. Lee, Federico Polverino, Leonardo Quarta, Maximilian Filzmayer, Michele Petix, Jordan A. Goyal, Nicola Longo, Gennaro Musi, Felix K.H. Chun, Alberto Briganti, Shahrokh F. Shariat, Fred Saad, Pierre I. Karakiewicz, Tumor size effect on cancer-specific mortality in T2N0M0 urothelial bladder cancer treated with trimodal therapy, Urologic Oncology: Seminars and Original Investigations, 10.1016/j.urolonc.2026.111076, 44, 5, (111076), (2026).
- Heinz Ludwig, Evangelos Terpos, Mario Boccadoro, Sara Martínez, Carmen Kahatt, Javier Jiménez, Antonio Nieto, Sonia Extremera, Javier Gómez, Vicente Alfaro, Ruthanna Davi, Xiang Yin, María Victoria Mateos, Plitidepsin in combination with dexamethasone (ADMYRE trial) versus an external control arm of pomalidomide plus dexamethasone in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma, Annals of Hematology, 10.1007/s00277-026-06811-w, 105, 1, (2026).
- Dawn Lee, Alex Allen, Alan Lovell, Ahmed Abdelsabour, Edward C.F. Wilson, G.J. Melendez-Torres, How Similar Is Similar Enough? Assessment of Indirect Treatment Comparisons to Support Similarity for National Institute for Health and Care Excellence’s Cost Comparison Route, Value in Health, 10.1016/j.jval.2025.05.003, 28, 11, (1770-1779), (2025).
- Kelly E. McCann, Noran Osman, Joan Cannon, Lonnie Brent, Yuexi Wang, Jon Tepsick, Prithviraj Vikramsinh Mandora, Vincent Miller, Nancy Martin, Virginia G. Kaklamani, Goserelin 3-month depot shows non-inferiority to the monthly formulation in U.S. patients with premenopausal breast cancer: a real-world evidence study, Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, 10.1007/s10549-025-07656-z, 211, 2, (409-419), (2025).
- Troy J Kleber, Alexander D Sherry, Andrew J Arifin, Gabrielle S Kupferman, Ramez Kouzy, Joseph Abi Jaoude, Timothy A Lin, Esther J Beck, Avital M Miller, Adina H Passy, Zachary R McCaw, Pavlos Msaouel, Ethan B Ludmir, Justification, margin values, and analysis populations for oncologic noninferiority and equivalence trials: a meta-epidemiological study, JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 10.1093/jnci/djae318, 117, 5, (898-906), (2024).
- Sven G. Meuth, Stephanie Wolff, Anna Mück, Alice Willison, Konstanze Kleinschnitz, Saskia Räuber, Marc Pawlitzki, Franz Felix Konen, Thomas Skripuletz, Matthias Grothe, Tobias Ruck, Hagen B. Huttner, Christoph Kleinschnitz, Tobias Bopp, Refik Pul, Bruce A. C. Cree, Hans‐Peter Hartung, Kathrin Möllenhoff, Steffen Pfeuffer, Different Treatment Outcomes of Multiple Sclerosis Patients Receiving Ocrelizumab or Ofatumumab, Annals of Neurology, 10.1002/ana.27143, 97, 3, (583-595), (2024).