Abstract
In recent years, regulatory approval of stents has been based on studies that have a noninferiority design, which has its own inherent complexities. We critically appraise in this article, the TALENT trial that established the noninferiority of the Indian-manufactured Supraflex stent (a third-generation, sirolimus-eluting stent with an ultrathin strut thickness) compared with the Xience stent (an internationally available, everolimus-eluting stent with a thicker strut) for a device-oriented composite end point at the end of 12 months. Our analysis shows that if the risk ratio rather than absolute risk difference was used to calculate the noninferiority margin, we would obtain a value of 1.48 for the risk ratio. Supraflex would then be noninferior to Xience by 0.92 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.59 to 1.47]. The upper bound of the 95% CI of 1.47 is dangerously close to 1.48, indicating that the TALENT trial would just about manage to prove noninferiority.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
