Abstract
In a clinical trial of diagnostic procedures to indicate non-inferiority, the efficacy is generally evaluated on the basis of the results from multiple raters who interpret and report their findings independently. Although we can handle the multiple results from the multiple raters as if there were a single rater by considering consensus evaluations or majority votes, this handling is not recommended for the primary evaluation. Therefore, all results from the multiple independent raters should be used in the analysis. This chapter addresses a non-inferiority test, confidence interval and sample size formula, for inference of the difference in correlated proportions between the two diagnostic procedures based on the multiple raters. Moreover, we illustrate the methods with data from studies of diagnostic procedures for the diagnosis of oesophageal carcinoma infiltrating the tracheobronchial tree and for the diagnosis of aneurysm in patients with acute subarachnoid hemorrhage.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Guidance for industry. Developing medical imaging drugs and biological products. Part 3: design, analysis, and interpretation of clinical studies (2004). URL http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/ucm071604.pdf. Cited 21 May 2012
Appendix 1 to the guideline on clinical evaluation of diagnostic agents (CPMP/EWP/1119/98 REV. 1) on imaging agents (Doc. Ref. EMEA/CHMP/EWP/321180/2008) (2009). URL http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientific_guideline/2009/09/WC500003581.pdf. Cited 21 May 2012
Durkalski, V., Palesch, Y., Lipsitz, S., Rust, P.: Analysis of clustered matched-pair data for a non-inferiority study design. Statistics in Medicine 22, 279–290 (2003). DOI 10.1002/sim.1385
Jäger, H., Mansmann, U., Hausmann, O., Partzsch, U., Moseley, I., Taylor, W.: MRA versus digital subtraction angiography in acute subarachnoid haemorrhage: a blinded multireader study of prospectively recruited patients. Neuroradiology 42, 313–326 (2000)
Jin, H., Lu, Y.: Comparison of correlated proportions based on paired binary data from clustered samples. Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference 139, 4206–4212 (2009). DOI 10.1016/j.jspi.2009.06.005
Lehr, R., Kashanian, F.: Three persistent issues in analysis of clinical trials involving diagnostic contrast agents. Drug Information Journal 43, 525–532 (2009). DOI 10.1177/009286150904300501
Lu, Y., Bean, J.: On the sample size for one-sided equivalence of sensitivities based upon McNemar’s test. Statistics in Medicine 14, 1831–1839 (1995). DOI 10.1002/sim.4780141611
Lu, Y., Jin, H., Genant, H.: On the non-inferiority of a diagnostic test based on paired observations. Statistics in Medicine 22, 3029–3044 (2003). DOI 10.1002/sim.1569
McNemar, Q.: Note on the sampling error of the difference between correlated proportions or percentages. Psychometrika 12, 153–157 (1947). DOI 10.1007/BF02295996
Nam, J.: Establishing equivalence of two treatments and sample size requirements in matched-pairs design. Biometrics 53, 1422–1430 (1997)
Nam, J., Kwon, D.: Non-inferiority tests for clustered matched-pair data. Statistics in Medicine 28, 1668–1679 (2009). DOI 10.1002/sim.3580
Obuchowski, N., Lieber, M.: Statistics and methodology. Skeletal Radiology 37, 393–396 (2008). DOI 10.1007/s00256-008-0448-1
Rapp-Bernhardt, U., Welte, T., Budinger, M., Bernhardt, T.: Comparison of three-dimensional virtual endoscopy with bronchoscopy in patients with oesophageal carcinoma infiltrating the tracheobronchial tree. The British Journal of Radiology 71, 1271–1278 (1998)
Saeki, H., Tango, T.: Non-inferiority test and confidence interval for the difference in correlated proportions in diagnostic procedures based on multiple raters. Statistics in Medicine 30, 3313–3327 (2011). DOI 10. 1002/sim.4364
Schouten, H.: Estimating kappa from binocular data and comparing marginal probabilities. Statistics in Medicine 12, 2207–2217 (1993). DOI 10.1002/sim.4780122306
Schwenke, C., Busse, R.: Analysis of differences in proportions from clustered data with multiple measurements in diagnostic studies. Methods of Information in Medicine 46, 548–552 (2007). DOI 10.1160/ ME0433
Tango, T.: Equivalence test and confidence interval for the difference in proportions for the paired-sample design. Statistics in Medicine 17, 891–908 (1998). DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19980430)17: 8\(\langle 891::\mathrm{AID}\mbox{ -}\mathrm{SIM780}\rangle\) 3.0.CO;2-B
Zhou, X., Obuchowski, N., McClish, D.: Statistical Methods in Diagnostic Medicine, 2nd edn. Wiley & Sons, New York (2011)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Saeki, H., Tango, T. (2014). Statistical Inference for Non-inferiority of a Diagnostic Procedure Compared to an Alternative Procedure, Based on the Difference in Correlated Proportions from Multiple Raters. In: van Montfort, K., Oud, J., Ghidey, W. (eds) Developments in Statistical Evaluation of Clinical Trials. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-55345-5_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-55345-5_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-55344-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-55345-5
eBook Packages: Mathematics and StatisticsMathematics and Statistics (R0)