Defining non-inferiority margins in randomised controlled surgical trials: a protocol for a systematic review.

Publisher: BMJ Publishing Group Ltd Country of Publication: England NLM ID: 101552874 Publication Model: Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 2044-6055 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 20446055 NLM ISO Abbreviation: BMJ Open Subsets: MEDLINE

Original Publication: [London] : BMJ Publishing Group Ltd, 2011-

Equivalence Trials as Topic* ; Research Design*/standards; Humans ; Abdomen/surgery ; Systematic Reviews as Topic

Background: The reporting of randomised controlled non-inferiority (NI) drug trials is poor with less than 50% of published trials reporting a justification of the NI margin. This is despite the introduction of the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) extension on reporting of NI and equivalence in randomised trials. It is critical to set the appropriate NI margin as this choice dictates the conclusions of the trial. Methods to estimate the margin are heterogeneous but generally based on clinical judgement and statistical reasoning, and hence tailored to each clinical situation. Yet an appraisal of NI in clinical trials has not been undertaken. Therefore the aim of this systematic review is to assess the reporting and methodological quality of defining the NI margin. Surgical NI trials have been chosen as our prototype to assess this.
Methods: We will conduct a systematic review of published randomised controlled trials in abdominal surgery that use an NI design. Key eligibility criteria will be: surgical intervention in at least one trial arm; adult patients and a sample size of 100 or more. Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials will be searched from inception until the date of the search. Identified studies will be assessed for reporting according to the CONSORT recommendations. The outcomes are the description of the methods for defining the NI margin, and the robustness of the NI margin estimation. The latter will be based on simulations using alternative assumptions for model parameters. The results of the simulation will be compared with the trial authors' conclusions.
Anticipated Results: The review will describe and appraise the design and reporting of surgical NI trials including shortcomings thereof and allow a comparison with pharmaceutical trials. These findings will inform researchers on the appropriate design and pitfalls when conducting surgical randomised controlled trials with an NI design and promote thorough and standardised reporting of study findings.
Ethics and Dissemination: Ethical approval is not required and any changes to the protocol will be communicated via the registration platform. The final manuscript will be submitted to a journal for publication and the findings will be disseminated through conference presentations to inform researchers and the public.
Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared.
(© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Trials. 2021 Oct 16;22(1):708. (PMID: 34656155)
Stat Med. 1985 Apr-Jun;4(2):213-26. (PMID: 4023479)
BMJ Open. 2016 Oct 7;6(10):e012594. (PMID: 27855102)
Arch Dis Child. 2018 Nov;103(11):1067-1075. (PMID: 29794107)
PLoS One. 2010 Oct 27;5(10):e13550. (PMID: 21048948)
Stat Med. 1998 Apr 30;17(8):873-90. (PMID: 9595617)
BMJ. 2019 Aug 28;366:l4898. (PMID: 31462531)
Trials. 2012 Nov 16;13:214. (PMID: 23157733)
Trials. 2017 Mar 7;18(1):107. (PMID: 28270184)
Clin Infect Dis. 2023 Oct 5;77(7):1023-1031. (PMID: 37243351)
JAMA. 2006 Mar 8;295(10):1152-60. (PMID: 16522836)

Keywords: randomized controlled trial; research design; surgery; systematic review

Date Created: 20240824 Date Completed: 20240824 Latest Revision: 20240910

20240910

PMC11344494

10.1136/bmjopen-2024-089587

39181565