Non-inferiority Research Articles

Measles-Rubella Microarray Patches Phase III Clinical Trial Framework: Proposal and Considerations.

Background: The Measles-Rubella Microarray Patch (MR-MAP) is an important technology that is expected to reduce coverage and equity gaps for measles-containing vaccines (MCVs), reach zero-dose children, and contribute to elimination of measles and rubella. MR-MAPs are anticipated to be easier to deploy programmatically and could be delivered by lesser-trained health workers, thereby increasing immunization coverage. The most advanced MR-MAP has reached clinical proof-of-concept through a Phase I/II trial in the target population of infants and young children. The World Health Organization (WHO) and partners have developed the Phase III clinical trial framework for MR-MAPs presented in this article. Objectives and Methods: The purpose of such framework is to inform the considerations, design and approach for the pivotal clinical trial design, while considering the anticipated data requirements to inform regulatory approval, WHO prequalification, and policy decision. Results: The proposed Phase III trial would compare the immunogenicity and safety of an MR-MAP with MR vaccine delivered subcutaneously in 9- to 10-month-old infants. An analysis of non-inferiority (NI) of immunogenicity would occur six weeks after the first dose. Should regulatory agencies or policy makers require, a proportion of infants could receive a second dose of either the same or alternate MR vaccine presentation six months after the first dose, with those children returning six weeks after the second dose for a descriptive assessment of immunogenicity, and then followed up six months after the second dose for evaluation of safety and immunogenicity. It is anticipated that this proposed pivotal Phase III trial framework would generate the required clinical data for regulatory licensure and WHO prequalification (PQ) of MR-MAPs. However, the trial design would need to be reviewed and confirmed by a national regulatory authority (NRA) that will assess the product for regulatory licensure and the WHO PQ team. Additional research will likely be required to generate data on concomitant vaccine delivery, the safety and immunogenicity of MR-MAPs in other age groups such as children 1-5 years and infants younger than 9 months of age, and the impact of MR-MAPs on coverage and equity. Such studies could be conducted during or after clinical MR-MAP development.

Some superiority trials with non-significant results published in high impact factor journals correspond to non-inferiority situations: a research-on-research study

Many negative randomized controlled trials (RCTs) report spin in their conclusions to highlight the benefits of the experimental arm, which could correspond to a non-inferiority (NI) objective. We aimed to evaluate whether some negative superiority RCTs comparing two active interventions could correspond to an NI situation and to explore associated trial characteristics. We searched PubMed for superiority RCTs comparing two active interventions with non-statistically significant results for the primary outcome that were published in 2021 in the 5 journals with the highest impact factor in each medical specialty. Three reviewers independently evaluated whether trials could correspond to an NI situation (i.e., an evaluation of efficacy as the primary outcome, with the experimental intervention presenting advantages including better safety profile, ease of administration, or decreased cost as compared with the control intervention). Of the 147 trials included, 19 (12.9%, 95% CI [7.9%, 19.4%]) corresponded to a potential NI situation, and as compared with trials not in a potential NI situation, they were published in a journal with a lower impact factor (median impact factor 8.7 vs 15.6), were more frequently rated at high or some concerns regarding risk of bias (n=14, 73.7% vs. n=69, 53.9%) and reported spin in the article conclusions (n=11, 57.9% vs. n=24, 18.8%). A non-negligible proportion of superiority negative trials comparing two active interventions could correspond to an NI situation. These trials seemed at increased risk of bias and frequently reported spin in the conclusions, which may distort the interpretation of results.

Optimization the design of fixed and group sequential three-arm non-inferiority trials with dichotomous endpoints of risk difference and odds ratio

Although the risk difference (RD) is the most common and well explored functional form for testing efficacy with dichotomous endpoint, odds ratio (OR) is also suggested and well applied measure for non-inferiority (NI) trials. Since the construction and interpretation of these function forms are quite different, this study aims to provide detailed discussions and comprehensive comparisons on the design and testing approach for RD and OR scales for the fixed and group sequential three-arm NI trials under various of situations. The sample size determinations and testing approaches for assessing NI of a new treatment in three-arm clinical trials for RD and OR scales were reviewed comprehensively. Simulation studies are conducted for hundreds of scenarios with parameter configurations of the response rates, randomized allocations, NI margins and interim analysis. The operating characteristic (OC) of RD and OR scales based on the MLE and RMLE methods were thoroughly investigated. A trial example was designed and analyzed to demonstrate the methodologies. It is found that sample size determination on OR scale gives smaller sample size and robust procedure compared to RD scale in the majority of situations. When evaluating the behaviors of the attained power, the RMLE methods based on OR scale outperforms the MLE method and tend to have more power to reject the null hypothesis especially under the small sample size situations. Compared to the fixed design, the group sequential design has better OC, which provides a comparable power while needing smaller total average sample sizes for all cases. In addition, we suggest a lower significance level with a higher power for the sample size determination in the superiority test stage in the group sequential design, which can significantly reduce the total sample sizes while the number of subjects in the placebo group does not increase much. It can offer some recommendations for the investigators to choose the optimal endpoints and parameter configurations to design a three-arm NI trial under certain situations.

Pain after Licorice or Sugar-Water Gargling in Patients Recovering from Oropharyngeal Surgery-A Randomized, Double-Blind Trial.

Glycyrrhiza glabrata (licorice) is used in traditional medicine and herbal remedies and reduces sore throats consequent to intubation, but whether it is protective for more intense pain after oropharyngeal surgery remains unclear. We thus tested the joint hypothesis that gargling with licorice, which has anti-inflammatory and antioxidant properties, reduces postoperative pain and morphine consumption. We enrolled patients having elective oropharyngeal surgery. Participants were randomly allocated to gargle with either 1 g licorice or a sugar placebo before and for up to three days after surgery. A numerical rating scale (NRS) for pain along with morphine consumption was evaluated every 30 min during the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) stay and then three times daily for three days. We pre-specified that licorice gargling would be deemed better than sugar gargling only if found non-inferior on both morphine consumption and pain score and superior on at least one of the two. 65 patients were randomized to the licorice group and 61 to placebo. We found noninferiority (NI) in pain scores with an estimated mean difference of -0.09 (95.2% CI: -0.88, 0.70; p = 0.001; NI delta = 1) between licorice and placebo gargling. There were no adverse events reported in either group that required treatment discontinuation. Gargling with licorice did not significantly or meaningfully reduce postoperative pain or morphine consumption in patients recovering from oropharyngeal surgery. While higher doses might prove more effective, our results suggest that other topical analgesics should be considered.

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

BackgroundThe 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...

Treating severe paediatric asthma with mepolizumab or omalizumab: a protocol for the TREAT randomised non-inferiority trial

IntroductionA minority of school-aged children with asthma have persistent poor control and experience frequent asthma attacks despite maximal prescribed maintenance therapy. These children have higher morbidity and risk of death....

Long-Term Analysis of NRG Oncology RTOG 0415: A Randomized Phase III Noninferiority Study Comparing Two Fractionation Schedules in Patients With Low-Risk Prostate Cancer.

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical Trial Updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported.NRG Oncology RTOG 0415 is a randomized phase III noninferiority (NI) clinical trial comparing conventional fractionation (73.8 Gy in 41 fractions) radiotherapy (C-RT) with hypofractionation (H-RT; 70 Gy in 28) in patients with low-risk prostate cancer. The study included 1,092 protocol-eligible patients initially reported in 2016 with a median follow-up of 5.8 years. Updated results with median follow-up of 12.8 years are now presented. The estimated 12-year disease-free survival (DFS) is 56.1% (95% CI, 51.5 to 60.5) for C-RT and 61.8% (95% CI, 57.2 to 66.0) for H-RT. The DFS hazard ratio (H-RT/C-RT) is 0.85 (95% CI, 0.71 to 1.03), confirming NI (P < .001). Twelve-year cumulative incidence of biochemical failure (BF) was 17.0% (95% CI, 13.8 to 20.5) for C-RT and 9.9% (95% CI, 7.5 to 12.6) for H-RT. The HR (H-RT/C-RT) comparing biochemical recurrence between the two arms was 0.55 (95% CI, 0.39 to 0.78). Late grade ≥3 GI adverse event (AE) incidence is 3.2% (C-RT) versus 4.4% (H-RT), with relative risk (RR) for H-RT versus C-RT 1.39 (95% CI, 0.75 to 2.55). Late grade ≥3 genitourinary (GU) AE incidence is 3.4% (C-RT) versus 4.2% (H-RT), RR 1.26 (95% CI, 0.69 to 2.30). Long-term DFS is noninferior with H-RT compared with C-RT. BF is less with H-RT. No significant differences in late grade ≥3 GI/GU AEs were observed between assignments (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00331773).

Outcomes of Rituximab-abbs versus Rituximab in Patients with Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma in a Noninferiority Study.

Rituximab with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP) is one of the first line treatments for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Rituximab comprises most of the treatment cost for this regimen; therefore, biosimilars, such as rituximab-abbs are crucial to provide affordable care. Although rituximab-abbs was studied primarily in follicular lymphoma, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved this drug for all indications of the reference product on the basis of extrapolation. Effectiveness and safety data surrounding the use of rituximab-abbs in DLBCL is lacking. To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of rituximab-abbs and reference product rituximab as R-CHOP treatment for patients with DLBCL. This noninferiority (NI) study compared the 2-year overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR), and incidence of adverse events (AEs) between rituximab-abbs and its reference product (RP) in R-CHOP among adult patients with newly diagnosed DLBCL. The study inclusion period was from 1 January 2019 to 31 December 2020. Analyses were performed on the basis of a noninferiority lower limit of 10% for OS and ORR, and an upper limit of 10% for serious AEs. There were 240 patients who received RP rituximab, while 295 patients received rituximab-abbs. The cohort had a mean age of 63.7±12.2 years and 43% were female. The 2-year OS was 81.0% and 79.6% (NI p < 0.01) while the ORR was 80.0% and 69.6% (NI p < 0.01), among the rituximab-abbs and rituximab groups, respectively. The incidence of infusion reaction AEs (NI p < 0.01) and noninfusion reaction AEs (NI p < 0.01) also met noninferiority. We demonstrated that rituximab-abbs was noninferior to rituximab in both effectiveness and safety among patients receiving R-CHOP for DLBCL in this study. Long-term follow-up would be needed to confirm these results.

Tolerability and efficacy of BrECADD versus BEACOPP in advanced stage classical Hodgkin lymphoma: GHSG HD21, a randomized study.

LBA7000 Background: We hypothesized that therapy with the novel BrECADD regimen (brentuximab vedotin, etoposide, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, dacarbazine, dexamethasone) guided by positron emission tomography after two cycles (PET2) could improve the treatment of advanced-stage classical Hodgkin lymphoma (AS-cHL). The HD21 trial aimed at demonstrating superiority over the intensified BEACOPP regimen (bleomycin, etoposide, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, procarbazine, prednisone) in terms of treatment-related morbidity (TRMB) and non-inferiority (NI) in terms of progression-free survival (PFS). This is the first report of the final confirmative analysis of the HD21 trial. Methods: HD21 is an international, open-label, randomized phase III trial including AS-cHL patients 18-60 years at diagnosis. Patients were randomized to receive individualized 4 or 6 cycles of either BEACOPP or BrECADD guided by PET2 results. The co-primary endpoints included TRMB and PFS, which had been successfully established recently. Testing for superiority was planned with mature follow-up of four years. An adjusted alpha level of 0.047 was required to cross the efficacy boundary for superiority. The trial was conducted in accordance with ICH-GCP (NCT02661503) and supported by a research grant from Takeda Oncology. Results: The ITT (intention-to-treat) cohort for the efficacy analysis consisted of 1482 patients, of which 742 were randomized to receive BrECADD and 740 to BEACOPP. Median age was 31.1 years (range 18 to 60), 44% were female. PET2 was negative in 424 (57.5%) and 426 (58.2%) patients for BrECADD or eBEACOPP, respectively, and these were scheduled for 4 treatment cycles. With median follow-up of 48 months, 4y-PFS was 94.3% for BrECADD (95%-CI 92.6-96.1), and 90.9% for BEACOPP (95%-CI 88.7-93.1). The hazard ratio was 0.66 [95% CI 0.45-0.97], p=0.035). PFS benefit of BrECADD was driven by a reduction in early treatment failures, i.e., primary progression within 3 months (5 vs. 15) or early relapse between months 3 and 12 (11 vs. 23) and observed across all investigated subgroups. PET2-negative patients in the BrECADD group showed a 4-year PFS of 96.5%. 4-year OS was 98.5% for BrECADD and 98.2% for BEACOPP. Analyses of gonadal function demonstrated significantly higher follicle stimulating hormone recovery rates after one year in both men (67% vs. 24%) and women (89% vs. 68%) with higher birth-rates in the BrECADD group (n=60 vs. n=43). Conclusions: BrECADD is significantly more effective than BEACOPP and is associated with an unprecedentedly high 4-year PFS, reducing the risk of progression, relapse or death by a third. Together with an abbreviated treatment duration of only 3 months for the majority of patients and a favorable tolerability, treatment with PET2-individualized BrECADD sets a new benchmark for the treatment of adult patients with AS-cHL. Clinical trial information: NCT02661503 .

Abstract GS03-02: Mammographic surveillance in early breast cancer patients aged 50 years or over: results of the Mammo-50 non-inferiority trial of annual versus less frequent mammography

Abstract Introduction: Annual surveillance mammograms for an unspecified period, after treatment for early breast cancer, are widely practised in USA and Europe and represent a significant healthcare cost. Current UK guidelines recommend annual mammograms up to 5 years, then reverts to 3 year screening without specified risk stratification. Further evidence is needed to determine the optimum frequency and duration of mammographic surveillance. Methods: A multi-centre, randomised controlled, phase III trial of annual mammography versus 2-yearly for conservation surgery and 3-yearly mammograms for mastectomy patients up to 9 years. Women were eligible if aged 50 years or over at initial diagnosis of breast cancer (invasive or DCIS), and recurrence free 3 years post curative surgery. Primary outcome was breast cancer specific survival (BCSS). Secondary outcomes include recurrence free interval (RFI) and overall survival (OS). BCSS event was defined as deaths from breast cancer and RFI as any locoregional or distant invasive recurrence or new breast primary. 5000 women were needed to detect a 3% absolute non-inferiority (NI) margin for BCSS with 2.5% one-sided alpha and at least 85% power. Analyses were carried out on intention-to-treat basis. Results: 5235 women were randomised between April 2014 and September 2018. 4347 (83%) women were aged 55-75 years, 4203 (80%) had undergone conservation surgery, 4564 (87%) had invasive disease, 1162 (22%) had node positive disease, 4330 (83%) had ER positive tumours and 3812 (73%) were taking hormone therapy at the time of randomisation. Patient characteristics were balanced across arms. With a median of 5.4 years follow-up (interquartile range 4.6-5.9), 319 women have died; 104 of breast cancer (53 on annual arm; 51 on less frequent arm). BCSS at 5 years was 98.2% (95% CI 97.5-98.6%) on annual arm and 98.3% (95% CI 97.7-98.8%) on less frequent arm. Hazard ratio (HR) was 1.04 (95% CI 0.71 -1.54), demonstrating non-inferiority of less frequent mammograms at the 3% margin (NI p&amp;lt; 0.0001; critical value 2.71) and the 1% margin (NI p=0.02; critical value 1.56). 320 (6%) women had a new invasive breast cancer event (55 loco-regional recurrences, 85 new breast primaries, 139 distant recurrences and 41 with multiple invasive events); 164 on the annual arm compared to 156 on the less frequent arm. Five-year RFI was 94.2% (95% CI 93.2-95.1%) for the annual arm and 94.4% (95% CI 93.4-95.3%) for the less frequent arm; HR= 1.03; (95% CI 0.83-1.28) demonstrating non-inferiority at a 2% margin (NI p=0.006; critical value 1.36). OS at 5 years was 94.9% (95% CI 93.9-95.7%) on the annual arm and 94.3% (95% CI 93.3-95.2%) on the less frequent arm. Hazard ratio (HR) was 1.18 (95% CI 0.94 -1.47), demonstrating non-inferiority of less frequent mammograms at the 3% margin (NI p=0.003; critical value 1.61) and the 2.5% margin (NI p=0.02; critical value 1.51). A total of 14987 mammograms have been performed on the annual arm and 8047 on the less frequent arm. 1967 (75%) of 2618 women on the annual arm complied with their allocated schedule compared to 1775 (68%) of 2617 women on the less frequent arm. COVID-19 pandemic affected compliance; it is estimated that 345 (7%) women missed mammograms during the pandemic. A sensitivity analysis was performed on the 72% of women who fully complied with their scheduled mammograms as per protocol, and again NI was demonstrated for BCSS, RFI and OS. Conclusions: For patients aged 50 or older and 3 years post diagnosis, Mammo-50 demonstrated that less frequent mammograms were no worse than annual mammograms. These results provide evidence for less frequent mammographic surveillance for this patient population. Citation Format: Janet Dunn, Peter Donnelly, Nada Elbeltagi, Andrea Marshall, Alastair Thompson, Riccardo Audisio, Sarah Pinder, David Cameron, Amy Campbell, Sue Hartup, Lesley Turner, Annie Young, Helen Higgins, Eila Watson, Sophie Gasson, Peter Barrett-Lee, Claire Hulme, Bethany Shinkins, Peter Hall, Andy Evans. Mammographic surveillance in early breast cancer patients aged 50 years or over: results of the Mammo-50 non-inferiority trial of annual versus less frequent mammography [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2023 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2023 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(9 Suppl):Abstract nr GS03-02.

Abstract PO5-25-11: Appropriate use of interventional cohort studies with threshold-crossing designs for de-escalation trials in breast cancer

Abstract For some populations of patients with early breast cancer (BC), clinical outcomes have improved such that the focus has shifted to identifying aspects of therapy that can be reduced or omitted to spare patients toxicity without compromising outcomes. For example, in patients with HER2+ disease, introduction of HER2-targetted therapy significantly reduced event rates but at increased exposure to toxicity. For those with a pathological complete response (pCR) to neo-adjuvant anti-HER2 therapy, the absolute gain from continued adjuvant therapy is likely to be small and the event rate sufficiently low such that any deviation from the expected prognosis would be sufficient to infer failure of a reduced treatment strategy. Previous studies would usually adopt a non-inferiority (NI) trial randomising patients between standard of care (SOC) and reduced therapy. The reduced therapy would be declared non-inferior if the difference between the groups does not exceed a pre-agreed NI margin. Some populations, such as those described, have a very low rate of recurrence and thus large sample sizes are required to gain sufficient power resulting in several issues. In these situations, threshold-crossing designs, also known as interventional cohort studies (ICS), provide an alternative to traditional NI trials. In ICS, a single cohort is recruited and receives the reduced therapy. The event rate is compared to a pre-defined fixed threshold, above which recurrence rates would be considered unacceptable. When conducted appropriately, such studies are statistically and logistically efficient, and should be considered definitive. ICS can be used when 1. A stable background of SOC exists with robust data from which an appropriate crossing-boundary can be defined. Critically, the historical control population used to define the boundary must closely reflect the study population and those seen in clinical practice. 2. The event rate is sufficiently low and consequently has low variability, so a concurrent control group is not required because an accurate estimate of the event rate with SOC already exists. 3. The primary endpoint of interest is reliable, sensitive to treatment and timely to allow early stopping if interim analyses indicate an issue. The well-defined excellent prognosis of patients with HER2+ BC who have a pCR to contemporary neo-adjuvant therapy, coupled with the pattern of relapse rates dropping off rapidly after 3 years, makes this an appropriate setting for implementing such designs. Three recently initiated studies testing reduced therapy in this patient population, HER2-RADiCAL (NIHR131362), CompassHER2 (NCT04266249) and DECRESCENDO (NCT04675827), all have an ICS design. An ICS approach is also valid for trials testing avoidance of radiotherapy in very low-risk populations, where the absolute benefit is likely low and occurrence of late local events is salvageable so as not to impact on overall survival, such as in PRIMETIME (ISRCTN 41579286). In contrast, there are several settings where these designs should not be used. For example, in the assessment of systemic therapy in ER+ HER2- BC the recurrence rate is constant beyond 3 years meaning events cannot be picked up in a timely manner and a fixed threshold defined at 3/5 years would not allow preclusion of a later drop-off in efficacy. It would also be premature to use ICS in TNBC following immunotherapy as outcome data is not yet sufficiently mature to accurately define a suitable threshold. Finally, if relapse rates are not sufficiently low, natural variation in control group incidence rates would prevent setting a suitable fixed threshold. We will discuss the key requirements and design features for using ICS to efficiently evaluate avoidance of treatment in BC and highlight the importance of patient involvement in the development of such trials. Citation Format: Holly Tovey, Laura Finneran, Lucy Kilburn, Iain Macpherson, Andrew Wardley, Hilary Stobart, Lesley Turner, Mairead MacKenzie, Charlotte Coles, Cliona Kirwan, Judith Bliss. Appropriate use of interventional cohort studies with threshold-crossing designs for de-escalation trials in breast cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2023 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2023 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(9 Suppl):Abstract nr PO5-25-11.

Comparative efficacy of family mediated intervention versus early intensive behavioural intervention on symptom domains in children with autism spectrum disorder: A randomized controlled trial

BackgroundFamily Mediated Intervention (FMI) and Early Intensive Behavioural Intervention (EIBI) are found to be standard of care for children with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD). Comparison of their efficacy were assessed using ISAA as primary outcome measure. MethodsThis study was a parallel arm, open label, randomized active- controlled non-inferiority clinical trial. 50 Children diagnosed with ASD were randomized into FMI and EIBI groups. Clinical status was checked by using Indian scale for assessment of autism (ISAA), Oro- motor and sensory profile at baseline, after three and six months. ResultsDifference between change in mean ISAA score between FMI and EIBI group at the end of 6 months as per protocol (PP) analysis was −7.23 (CI=-18.41, 3.94), which was within pre-defined clinically relevant non-inferiority (NI) margin of – 24. FMI was found to be non-inferior to EIBI at the end of 6 months as the lower bound of 95% CI (-18.41) for ISAA score was higher than NI margin. ISAA scores were found to be statistically lower in both FMI and EIBI groups at the end point compared to baseline which indicated improvement in symptom severity. ConclusionFMI was non-inferior to EIBI as therapy for children with ASD at the end of six months. Finding also indicated longer duration of treatment is required for FMI to be superior. FMI can be recommended for children with ASD in view of improved ISAA scores reported in our study. Clinical trial registration numberCTRI/2020/08/027099 (Registered with Clinical Trials Registry- India)

Long-term clinical and radiological effectiveness and safety of ultralow doses of rituximab in rheumatoid arthritis: observational extension of the REDO trial

BackgroundThe REDO trial (REtreatment with Rituximab in RhEmatoid arthritis: Disease Outcome after Dose Optimisation) showed similar disease activity for retreatment with ultralow doses (200 mg and 500 mg per 6...

A Phase Three Study of the Safety and Immunogenicity of a Four-dose Series of 20-Valent Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine in Healthy Infants.

The 20-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV20) was developed to extend pneumococcal disease protection beyond 13-valent PCV (PCV13). This phase 3, double-blind study conducted in the United States/Puerto Rico evaluated PCV20 safety and immunogenicity. Healthy infants were randomized to receive a 4-dose series of PCV20 or PCV13 at 2, 4, 6 and 12-15 months old. Objectives included demonstrating noninferiority (NI) of PCV20 to PCV13 immunoglobulin G (IgG) geometric mean concentrations after doses 3 and 4 and percentages of participants with predefined IgG concentrations after dose 3, with 7 additional PCV20 serotypes compared with the lowest result among vaccine serotypes in the PCV13 group. Safety assessments included local reactions, systemic events, adverse events, serious adverse events and newly diagnosed chronic medical conditions. Overall, 1991 participants were vaccinated (PCV20, n = 1001; PCV13, n = 990). For IgG geometric mean concentrations 1 month after both doses 3 and 4, all 20 serotypes met NI criteria (geometric mean ratio lower 2-sided 95% confidence interval > 0.5). For percentages of participants with predefined IgG concentrations after dose 3, NI (percentage differences lower 2-sided 95% confidence interval > -10%) was met for 8/13 matched serotypes and 6/7 additional serotypes; 4 serotypes missed the statistical NI criterion by small margins. PCV20 also elicited functional and boosting responses to all 20 serotypes. The safety profile of PCV20 was similar to PCV13. A 4-dose series of PVC20 was well tolerated and elicited robust serotype-specific immune responses expected to help protect infants and young children against pneumococcal disease due to the 20 vaccine serotypes. Clinical trial registration: NCT04382326.

Phase 3 Safety and Immunogenicity Study of a Three-dose Series of Twenty-valent Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine in Healthy Infants and Toddlers.

Global pediatric immunization programs with pneumococcal conjugate vaccines (PCVs) have reduced vaccine-type pneumococcal disease, but a substantial disease burden of non-PCV serotypes remains. This phase 3, randomized (1:1), double-blind study evaluated safety and immunogenicity of 20-valent PCV (PCV20) relative to 13-valent PCV (PCV13) in healthy infants. Participants received 2 infant doses and a toddler dose of PCV20 or PCV13, with diphtheria-tetanus-acellular pertussis combination vaccine at all doses and measles, mumps, rubella and varicella vaccines at the toddler dose. Primary pneumococcal immunogenicity objectives were to demonstrate noninferiority (NI) of PCV20 to PCV13 for immunoglobulin G geometric mean concentrations after infant and toddler doses and percentages of participants with predefined serotype-specific immunoglobulin G concentrations after infant doses. Safety endpoints included local reactions, systemic events and adverse events. Overall, 1204 participants were vaccinated (PCV20, n = 601; PCV13, n = 603). One month after the toddler dose, 19/20 serotypes met NI for immunoglobulin G geometric mean concentrations; serotype 6B narrowly missed NI [PCV20/PCV13 geometric mean ratio: 0.57 (2-sided 95% confidence interval: 0.48-0.67); NI criterion: lower 2-sided 95% confidence interval >0.5]. Sixteen/twenty serotypes met NI for ≥1 primary objective after 2 infant doses. PCV20 induced robust opsonophagocytic activity, and boosting responses were observed for all vaccine serotypes, including those missing statistical NI. The safety/tolerability profile of PCV20 was like that of PCV13. PCV20 3-dose series in infants was safe and elicited robust immune responses. Based on these results and PCV13 experience, PCV20 3-dose series is expected to be protective for all 20 vaccine serotypes. NCT04546425.

Evaluation of the analgesic efficacy of grapiprant compared with robenacoxib in cats undergoing elective ovariohysterectomy in a prospective, randomized, masked, non-inferiority clinical trial.

The main objective of this study was to compare the postoperative analgesic effects of grapiprant with those of robenacoxib in cats undergoing ovariohysterectomy (OVH). In total, 37 female cats (age range 4 months-10 years, weighing ⩾2.5 kg) were enrolled in a prospective, randomized, masked, non-inferiority (NI) clinical trial. Cats received oral robenacoxib (1 mg/kg) or grapiprant (2 mg/kg) 2 h before OVH. Analgesia was assessed via the Feline Grimace Scale (FGS), the Glasgow Composite Measure Pain Scale-Feline (CMPS-F), von Frey monofilaments (vFFs) and pressure algometry (ALG) 2 h before treatment administration, at extubation, and 2, 4, 6, 8, 18 and 24 hours after extubation. Hydromorphone (<8 h postoperatively) or buprenorphine (>18 h postoperatively) were administered to cats with scores of ⩾5/20 on CMPS-F and/or ⩾4/10 on FGS. NI margins for CMPS-F and vFFs were set at 3 and -0.2, respectively. A mixed-effect ANOVA was used for FGS scores (P <0.05). Data are reported as mean ± SEM. The data from 33 cats were analyzed. The upper limit of the 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.35) was less than the NI margin of 3 for CMPS-F, and the lower limit of the 95% CI (0.055) was greater than the NI margin of -0.2 for vFFs, indicating NI of grapiprant. The FGS scores were greater than baseline at extubation for both treatments (1.65 ± 0.63; P = 0.001); however, there was no difference between treatments. There was no difference between treatments, nor treatment by time interaction, for vFFs (P <0.001). The CMPS-F scores for both treatments were higher at extubation but returned to baseline after 4 h (P <0.001). For ALG, there was no difference in treatment or treatment by time interaction. The robenacoxib group had lower pressure readings at extubation and 6 h compared with baseline. These results indicate that grapiprant was non-inferior to robenacoxib for mitigating postsurgical pain in cats after OVH performed via ventral celiotomy. The impact of grapiprant for analgesia in OVH via the flank is unknown.

OP15 High-definition white light endoscopy with segmental re-inspection is non-inferior compared to dye-based chromoendoscopy in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: the randomized controlled HELIOS trial

Abstract Background Patients with colonic inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) undergo endoscopic surveillance to detect and remove colorectal neoplasia (CRN). Although high-definition dye-based chromo-endoscopy (HD-CE) is the recommended modality in guidelines, high-definition white light endoscopy (HD-WLE) with matched procedural time may yield similar neoplasia detection rates. We designed a non-blinded, randomized controlled trial in four academic hospitals aiming to compare three endoscopic surveillance techniques in IBD patients for the outcome of CRN detection rate. Methods Eligible patients were aged ≥18 years and scheduled for colitis-associated CRN surveillance according to Dutch IBD surveillance guidelines. Patients were excluded in case of insufficient bowel cleansing, active colitis, or if &amp;gt;50% of the colon was resected. Patients were randomly assigned (2:2:1) to undergo HD-WLE with segmental re-inspection (SR), HD-CE, or single pass HD-WLE. The primary outcome was CRN detection rate, defined as the proportion of procedures in which macroscopic CRN was detected. Secondary outcomes included the number of CRN and withdrawal time. To demonstrate non-inferiority of HD-WLE with SR compared to HD-CE (one-sided testing, α=0.05, 1−β=0.8, non-inferiority (NI) margin -10%), and superiority compared to single-pass HD-WLE (two-sided testing, estimated CRN detection rate of 24% and 12%, respectively1) with Mantel-Haenszel analyses, a total of 566 patients were needed. Results In total, 666 patients were randomized, 563 fulfilled all study criteria and were analysed per protocol (table 1). Of these, 51.8% were male, with a median age of 51 years (interquartile range 35-63). CRN detection rates were 9.8% for HD-WLE with SR, 13.1% for HD-CE, and 6.1% for single pass HD-WLE. HD-WLE with SR was non-inferior compared to HD-CE (Δ-3.1%, lower boundary of the 95% confidence interval (CI) -8.1 not exceeding the NI margin of -10%, p&amp;lt;.05). HD-WLE with SR was not superior compared to single-pass HD-WLE (Δ3.7%, 95% CI -2.5:9.1%, p=0.31). A significant difference was found between arms for the number of detected CRN (n=29 vs n=36 vs n=8 for HD-WLE with SR, HD-CE and single-pass HD-WLE, respectively (p=.04)) and withdrawal time (p=.03, table 1). One advanced lesion was detected (high-grade dysplasia in the HD-CE arm). Conclusion In this large, randomized controlled trial, HD-WLE with SR was non-inferior compared to HD-CE for CRN detection in IBD patients. HD-WLE with SR was not superior to single-pass HD-WLE, although this may have resulted from lower than expected neoplasia yields and subsequent lower power. These results suggest that HD-WLE with SR may provide a feasible alternative to HD-CE in clinical practice (NCT04291976). 1Imperatore et al. JCC 2019;13(6):714-24

Non-inferiority Clinical Trials: Treating Margin as Missing Information

Non-inferiority (NI) clinical trials’ goal is to demonstrate that a new treatment is not worse than a standard of care by a certain amount called margin. The choice of non-inferiority margin is not straightforward as it depends on historical data, and clinical experts’ opinion. Knowing the “true”, objective clinical margin would be helpful for design and analysis of non-inferiority trials, but it is not possible in practice. We propose to treat non-inferiority margin as missing information. In order to recover an objective margin, we believe it is essential to conduct a survey among a group of representative clinical experts. We introduce a novel framework, where data obtained from a survey are combined with NI trial data, so that both an estimated clinically acceptable margin and its uncertainty are accounted for when claiming non-inferiority. Through simulations, we compare several methods for implementing this framework. We believe the proposed framework would lead to better informed decisions regarding new potentially non-inferior treatments and could help resolve current practical issues related to the choice of the margin.

A comparison between a gastroesophageal reflux disease questionnaire-based algorithm and multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH monitoring for the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux-induced chronic cough.

Empiric therapy with multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH monitoring (MII-pH) has been used for the initial treatment of gastroesophageal reflux-induced chronic cough (GERC). However, an algorithm based on the gastroesophageal reflux disease questionnaire (GerdQ) has the potential to achieve a simple, structured, and effective treatment approach for patients with GERC. This study compared the efficacy of anti-reflux therapy based on GerdQ (new structured pathway, NSP) with medical treatment after MII-pH examination (ordinary clinical pathway, OCP) in the management of GERC. For the NSP, we adapted the GerdQ score to establish the basis for a treatment algorithm. For the OCP, treatment was determined using the MII-pH examination results. The non-inferiority (NI) hypothesis was used to evaluate NSP versus OCP. Overall, the NSP and OCP-based therapeutic algorithms have similar efficacy for GERC [NI analysis: 95% confidence interval (CI), -4.97 to 17.73, p = 0.009; superiority analysis: p = 0.420]. Moreover, the cough symptom scores and cough threshold improved faster in the NSP group than in the OCP group at week 8 (p < 0.05). In the subgroup analyses using the GerdQ and GerdQ impact scale (GIS) scores, patients with low-likelihood GERC (GerdQ < 8) were more likely to benefit from OCP (NI analysis: 95% CI, -19.73 to 18.02, p = 0.213). On the other hand, in patients with high-likelihood and low-reflux impact GERC patients (GerdQ > 8 and GIS < 4), the NSP arm was not inferior to the standard treatment of OCP (NI analysis: 95% CI, -8.85 to 28.21%, p = 0.04; superiority analysis: p = 0.339), indicating that GerdQ- and GIS-guided diagnosis and management of patients with GERC could be an alternative to MII-pH management, especially in settings with reduced medical resources. The use of the GerdQ algorithm should be considered when handling patients with GERC in the primary care setting. This research was registered in the Chinese Clinical Trials Registry (ChiCTR-ODT-12001899).

Efficacy of Parallel and Crossover Analysis As Well As Pharmacokinetic Similarity Were Confirmed between ABP 959 and Eculizumab Reference Product in Patients with PNH

Introduction: ABP 959, a biosimilar to eculizumab reference product (RP), binds to the human complement component 5 protein to inhibit terminal complement activation. Eculizumab RP is approved for the treatment of patients with paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria (PNH), atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome, generalized myasthenia gravis, and neuromyelitis optical spectrum disorder. Regulatory approval of biosimilars is based on a totality of evidence approach which includes demonstration of similarity in analytical and non-clinical characteristics, and in comparative clinical studies. Analytical and non-clinical similarities of ABP 959 with eculizumab RP and clinical pharmacokinetics (PK)/pharmacodynamics (PD) and safety similarities in healthy adults have been previously reported. Similarity of the primary efficacy and safety results from the parallel and crossover comparisons in patients with PNH have also been previously reported. Here, we report together the primary efficacy results from both the parallel and the cross-over comparisons along with additional PK analyses in patients with PNH to further support the demonstration of similarity of ABP 959 with eculizumab RP. Methods: A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, 2-period crossover study evaluated the clinical similarity of ABP 959 compared with eculizumab RP in adult patients with PNH. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive each investigational product (900 mg of ABP 959 or eculizumab RP IV q14d) in 1 of 2 treatment sequences (ABP 959/eculizumab RP or eculizumab RP/ABP 959). Primary efficacy determined by hemolysis, measured by lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), was analyzed for both the parallel and crossover comparisons. The parallel comparison endpoint was measured at week 27 and clinical similarity was assessed by comparing the 1-sided 97.5% upper confidence interval (CI) limit for the geometric least squares (LS) mean ratio of LDH between ABP 959 treatment group and eculizumab RP treatment group with a non-inferiority (NI) margin of 2.873. The crossover comparison endpoint was measured by the time-adjusted area under the effect curve (AUEC) of LDH from weeks 13 to 27, 39 to 53, and 65 to 79. The similarity of efficacy between treatment groups was assessed by comparing the 2-sided 90% CI for the geometric mean ratio (GMR) of the time-adjusted AUEC of LDH with a similarity margin of (0.77, 1.30). The total and unbound PK area under the curve (AUC) of ABP 959 and eculizumab RP from week 13 to week 15 and trough PK were identified as secondary endpoints in this study. Results: Forty-two patients (20 in ABP 959/eculizumab RP group; 22 in eculizumab RP/ABP 959 group) were randomized across 25 centers. Similarity of efficacy was established in both the parallel and crossover comparisons. In the parallel comparison, the ratio of the geometric LS means of LDH at week 27 (ABP 959 vs eculizumab RP) was 1.0628, with a 1-sided 97.5% upper CI of 1.1576 was contained within the NI margin of 2.873. In the crossover comparison, a point estimate of the GMR of time-adjusted AUEC of LDH (ABP 959 vs eculizumab RP) of 0.9812 with a 2-sided 90% CI of (0.9403-1.0239) was contained within the prespecified margin of similarity. The GMR (90% CI) for the total and unbound PK AUC from week 13 to week 15 was 0.9122 (0.7586, 1.0968) and 0.9508 (0.7454, 1.2130), respectively. Geometric mean values for trough total and unbound concentrations of ABP 959 and eculizumab RP were similar between the treatment groups at all time points tested over the entire study. Conclusions: Similarity in clinical efficacy in both parallel and crossover comparisons as determined by hemolysis in patients with PNH was established between ABP 959 and eculizumab RP. Additionally, analyses of serum total and unbound PK concentrations for patients with PNH further demonstrated PK similarity between ABP 959 and eculizumab RP. The results of this study, along with previously demonstrated analytical, non-clinical, clinical PK/PD in healthy adults, and efficacy and safety evaluations in PNH patients, further support a demonstration of no clinically meaningful differences between ABP 959 and eculizumab RP.