Equivalence and superiority testing in regeneration clinical trials

被引:60
|
作者
Gunsolley, JC
Elswick, RK
Davenport, JM
机构
[1] Virginia Commonwealth Univ, Dept Periodont, Richmond, VA USA
[2] Virginia Commonwealth Univ, Dept Biostat, Richmond, VA USA
[3] PPD Pharmaco, Richmond, VA USA
关键词
clinical trials; therapeutic equivalency; therapeutic similarity;
D O I
10.1902/jop.1998.69.5.521
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
THE PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT is to investigate sample size requirements for both equivalence and superiority studies investigating products used in regeneration. The goal of a superiority clinical trial is to determine if a new therapy is superior to an established therapy or placebo. In contrast to superiority trials, equivalence trials are used to determine if a new product has similar therapeutic properties to an established product. The sample sizes for the two different types of clinical trials were based on the following assumptions: an alpha of 0.05, a power of 0.80, a 2 group parallel arm study, and equal variances and sample sizes for both groups. Separate sample size calculations were done for both intrabony defects and Class II furcation defects. Sample sizes for the equivalence and superiority trials using the same criteria were the same. However, criteria for estimating sample sizes for equivalence clinical trials require much smaller differences between groups, resulting in much larger sample sizes. A criterion of a 20% difference between groups of the total therapeutic effect resulted in sample sizes which ranged from 64 to 127 in equivalence clinical trials. These samples sizes are much larger than have been generally used in clinical trials investigating periodontal regeneration.
引用
收藏
页码:521 / 527
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Equivalence, superiority, and negative clinical trials
    不详
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PERIODONTOLOGY, 1998, 69 (05) : 608 - 608
  • [2] Understanding superiority, noninferiority, and equivalence for clinical trials
    Kishore, Kamal
    Mahajan, Rahul
    [J]. INDIAN DERMATOLOGY ONLINE JOURNAL, 2020, 11 (06) : 890 - 894
  • [3] Hypothesis Testing in Superiority, Noninferiority, and Equivalence Clinical Trials Implications in Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
    Kumbhare, Dinesh
    Alavinia, Mohammad
    Furlan, Julio
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL MEDICINE & REHABILITATION, 2019, 98 (03) : 226 - 230
  • [4] ¿Clinical trials of superiority, non-inferiority or equivalence?
    Manterola, Carlos
    Hernandez-Leal, Maria Jose
    Otzen, Tamara
    Holguin, Juan Pablo
    Salgado, Carla
    Grande, Luis
    [J]. REVISTA CHILENA DE INFECTOLOGIA, 2024, 41 (01): : 157 - 164
  • [5] Evaluating "superiority", "'equivalence" and "non-inferiority" in clinical trials
    Turan, Fatma Nesrin
    Senocak, Mustafa
    [J]. ANNALS OF SAUDI MEDICINE, 2007, 27 (04) : 284 - 288
  • [6] Equivalence testing with dental clinical trials
    Burns, DR
    Elswick, RK
    [J]. JOURNAL OF DENTAL RESEARCH, 2001, 80 (06) : 1513 - 1517
  • [7] Editorial on hypothesis and objectives in clinical trials: superiority, equivalence and non-inferiority
    Gonzalez, Claudio D.
    Bolanos, Ricardo
    de Sereday, Martha
    [J]. THROMBOSIS JOURNAL, 2009, 7
  • [8] Editorial on hypothesis and objectives in clinical trials: superiority, equivalence and non-inferiority
    Claudio D Gonzalez
    Ricardo Bolaños
    Martha de Sereday
    [J]. Thrombosis Journal, 7 (1)
  • [9] Superiority, Equivalence, and Non-Inferiority Trials
    Lesaffre, Emmanuel
    [J]. BULLETIN OF THE HOSPITAL FOR JOINT DISEASES, 2008, 66 (02): : 150 - 154
  • [10] Testing for superiority or inferiority after concluding equivalence?
    Chuang-Stein, C
    [J]. DRUG INFORMATION JOURNAL, 2001, 35 (01): : 141 - 143