Journal of Clinical Medicine Research, ISSN 1918-3003 print, 1918-3011 online, Open Access
Article copyright, the authors; Journal compilation copyright, J Clin Med Res and Elmer Press Inc
Journal website http://www.jocmr.org

Original Article

Volume 10, Number 5, May 2018, pages 376-383


The Impact of the Underlying Risk in Control Group and Effect Measures in Non-Inferiority Trials With Time-to-Event Data: A Simulation Study

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1. Illustrative example of the simulation.
Figure 2.
Figure 2. Upper limit of 95%CI of hazard ratio versus the underlying risk in active control group (true hazard ratio = 1). We randomly selected 1,000 out of 10,000 simulated trials, but the fitted line used the entire data. The horizontal line was an empirical non-inferiority margin, hazard ratio of 1.35.
Figure 3.
Figure 3. The upper limit of difference in two Kaplan-Meier estimators versus follow up time (true hazard ratio = 1). We randomly selected 1,000 out of 10,000 simulated trials in this plot, but the fitted line used the entire data. The horizontal line was an empirical non-inferiority margin, representing the difference in two Kaplan-Meier estimators of 10%.

Tables

Table 1. The Probability of Rejecting the Null Hypothesis Using Hazard Ratio
 
Non-inferiority marginUnderlying risk in control group
< 10%10-25%25-75%> 75%
The probability of rejecting the null hypothesis is the same as the statistical power in our simulations.
True hazard ratio = 1
  HR = 1.20.0670.1520.3230.513
  HR = 1.350.1310.3230.6840.903
  HR = 1.50.2240.5270.8900.993
True hazard ratio = 0.95
  HR = 1.20.0940.2000.4820.716
  HR = 1.350.1940.4130.7900.968
  HR = 1.50.2860.6070.9350.999
True hazard ratio = 1.05
  HR = 1.20.0560.1120.1980.305
  HR = 1.350.1040.2520.5440.771
  HR = 1.50.1710.4250.8210.970

 

Table 2. The Probability of Rejecting The Null Hypothesis Using the Difference in Two Kaplan-Meier Estimators
 
Non-inferiority marginUnderlying risk in control group
< 10%10-25%25-75%> 75%
DTKME: difference in two Kaplan-Meier estimators at follow-up of 5 years. The probability of rejecting the null hypothesis is the same as the statistical power in our simulations.
True hazard ratio = 1
DTKME = 2.5%0.2210.1170.0770.123
DTKME = 5%0.6560.3340.1990.352
DTKME = 10%0.9810.8310.6070.842
DTKME = 15%1.0000.9900.9220.984
True hazard ratio = 0.95
DTKME = 2.5%0.2750.1540.1510.229
DTKME = 5%0.6990.4000.3190.502
DTKME = 10%0.9950.8850.7500.920
DTKME = 15%1.0000.9930.9601.000
True hazard ratio = 1.05
DTKME = 2.5%0.1900.0860.0390.058
DTKME = 5%0.5510.2570.1200.228
DTKME = 10%0.9770.7500.4680.735
DTKME = 15%1.0000.9770.8580.972