Choice of Delta in Equivalence Testing
- PDF / 772,571 Bytes
- 11 Pages / 504 x 720 pts Page_size
- 98 Downloads / 217 Views
0092-8615/2001 Copyright 0 2001 Drug Information Association Inc.
CHOICE OF DELTA IN EQUIVALENCE TESTING* TIE-HUANG, PHD Mathematical Statistician, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Rockville, Maryland
A valid interpretation of an active control equivalence study without a concurrent placebo control depends on the assumptions that 1. The active control is effective in the current
trial (ie, assay sensitivity), and 2. The effect size is the same across the studies (ie, constancy assumption). The equivalence margin 6 should be a small fraction (eg, 0.2) of the therapeutic effect of the active control as compared to placebo. Howevec a larger 6 can be justijied i f the objective is to establish the efficacyof the experimental treatment as compared to placebo through its comparison to the standard therapy without claiming equivalence. The proposed 6 may be interpreted as preserving a percentage of the active control effect as compared to placebo. The assumption that the active control effect is constant across studies may be discounted by using a smaller 6. Preservation and discounting are two distinct concepts, although they are indistinguishable mathematically. Placebo controls are not necessarily unethical when known effective therapy exists f o r a condition. When a placebo control is ethical, it is a clear choice i f the study objective is to establish the efficacy of the test treatment. A three-arm trial (test treatment, active control, and placebo) would be an ideal design if the study objective is to establish the efficacy of the test treatment relative to an active control. When a placebo control is unethical and there can be no concurrent placebo, an evaluation of the efficacy of the test treatment depends on the discount factor to be used. The discount factor is ojien difficult to justib. In such a situation, an evaluation of the efficacy of the test treatment may be supplemented by other designs such as an “add on” design or an early escape design. In fact, a hybrid of the active control design with the “add on” design (test treatment, active control, and combination) is an ideal design when the test treatment and the active control possess different phannacologic mechanisms. On the other hand, the discounting factor plays a less important role in an evaluation of the relative efficacy of the test treatment. Key Words: Active control; Equivalence margin; Equivalence testing; Discounting; Preservation
Presented at the DIA Workshop “Statistical Methodology in Clinical R&D,” April 2-4, 2001, Vienna, Austria. Reprint address: Tie-Hua Ng. 1 4 0 1 Rockville Pike, #273S. HFM-217, Rockville, MD 20852-1448. E-mail: NgQcber.fda.gov. *The views expressed in this paper are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect policies of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
1517
Downloaded from dij.sagepub.com at CENTRAL MICHIGAN UNIV on January 3, 2015
1518
Tie-Hua Ng
EQUIVALENCE TESTING THERE ARE TWO MAJOR types of equivalence in clinical research: therapeutic eq
Data Loading...
