Abstract
Increasingly, the goal of many studies is to determine if new therapies have equivalent or noninferior efficacies to the ones currently in use. These studies are called equivalence/noninferiority studies, and the statistical methods for their analysis require only simple modifications to the traditional hypotheses testing framework. Nevertheless, important and subtle issues arise with the application of such methods. This article describes the concepts and statistical methods involved in testing equivalence/noninferiority. The aim is to enable the clinician to understand and critically assess the growing number of articles utilizing such methods.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Staszewski S, Keisser P, Montaner J, et al. Abacavir-Lamivudine-Zidobudine vs Indinavir-Lamivudine-Zidobudine in antiretroviral-naïve HIV-infected adults. JAMA. 2001;285:1155–1163.
Schuirmann DJ. A comparison of the two one-sided tests procedure and the power approach for assessing equivalence of average bioavailability. J Pharmacokin Biopharm. 1987;15:657–680.
Fifth Organization to Assess Strategies in Acute Ischemic Syndromes Investigators (OASIS-5). Comparison of fondaparinux and enoxaparin in acute coronary syndromes. N Engl J Med. 2006;354:1464–76.
Wellek S. Testing Statistical Hypotheses of Equivalence. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall; 2003.
Garret AD. Therapeutic equivalence: fallacies and falsification. Statist Med. 2003;22:741–762.
Kaul S, Diamond GA. Good enough: a primer on the analysis and interpretation of noninferiority trials. Ann Intern Med. 2006;145:62–69.
Barker LE, Luman ET, McCauley MM, Chu SY. assessing equivalence: an alternative to the use of difference tests for measuring disparities in vaccination coverage. Am J Epidemiol. 2002;156:1056–1061.
Hintze J. PASS 2008. NCSS. LLC. Kaysville, Utah (www.ncss.com).
Wiens BL, Zhao W. The role of intention to treat in analysis of noninferiority studies. Clinical Trials. 2007;4:286–291.
Ebbutt AF, Frith L. Practical issues in equivalence trials. Statist Med. 1998;17:1691–1701.
http://www.fda.gov/downloads/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/ucm073113.pdf. (Accessed 8/24/2010).
Ellenberg SS, Temple R. Placebo-controlled trials and active-control trials in the evaluation of new treatments: part 2: practical issues and specific cases. Ann Intern Med. 2000;133:464–470.
Temple R, Ellenberg SS. Placebo-controlled trials and active-control trials in the evaluation of new treatments: part 1: ethical and scientific issues. Ann Intern Med. 2000;133:455–453.
Le Henanff A, Girardeau B, Baron G, et al. Quality of reporting of noninferiority and equivalence randomized trials. JAMA. 2006;295:1147–1151.
Gotzsche PC. Lessons from and cautions about noninferiority and equivalence random trials. JAMA. 2006;295:1172–74.
Piaggio G, Elbourne DR, Altman DG, et al. Reporting of noninferiority and equivalence randomized trials. An extension of the CONSORT statement. JAMA. 2006;295:1152–1160.
Conflict of Interest
None disclosed.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Walker, E., Nowacki, A.S. Understanding Equivalence and Noninferiority Testing. J GEN INTERN MED 26, 192–196 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-010-1513-8
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-010-1513-8