ライフサイエンスコーパス: noninferiority trial

1 late loss at 9-month angiographic follow-up (noninferiority trial).

2 ndomized, multicenter, open-label, phase III noninferiority trial.

3 gh Risk Trial was a multicenter, randomized, noninferiority trial.

4 veness (SALOME) was a phase 3, double-blind, noninferiority trial.

5 eek, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, noninferiority trial.

6 154 patients, 173 lesions) in a multicenter, noninferiority trial.

7 dy, a prospective, randomized, single-blind, noninferiority trial.

8 uated in the context of 8 recently published noninferiority trials.

9 me data from a carefully specified subset of noninferiority trials.

10 ostate cancer deaths in both superiority and noninferiority trials.

11 be aided by quantitative approaches used in noninferiority trials.

12 ity trials may produce misleading results in noninferiority trials.

13 endpoints could improve the design of future noninferiority trials.

14 on, and applicability of results specific to noninferiority trials.

15 erior to that of standard therapy are called noninferiority trials.

16 In a noninferiority trial, 499 patients with HCV genotype 2 o

17 In the noninferiority trial, a sustained response was reported

18 In this double-blind noninferiority trial, adult patients undergoing major ab

19 This dual-center, randomized, controlled, noninferiority trial aimed to prove that omission of dra

20 9 to April 2011, we included in a randomized noninferiority trial all HIV type 1-infected pregnant wo

21 12-week, single-blind, 3-group randomized noninferiority trial and subsequent 40-week maintenance

22 s regarding the design and interpretation of noninferiority trials and then explore some common metho

23 Active-control noninferiority trials are being performed with increasin

24 The authors conclude that if noninferiority trials are to be applied to clinical and

25 d superiority trial designs are recommended; noninferiority trials are to be used sparingly given the

26 We conducted this randomized, open-label, noninferiority trial at 14 centers in the United Kingdom

27 unblinded, monocentric, randomized clinical noninferiority trial at a tertiary neonatal intensive ca

28 This double-blind, randomized, noninferiority trial compared the efficacy of intramuscu

29 andomized, multicenter, single-blind, 2-arm, noninferiority trial-compared 2 biodegradable polymer dr

30 We conducted an open-label, randomized noninferiority trial comparing 3 months of directly obse

31 ated, single-blind, multicentre, randomized, noninferiority trial comparing BP-SES versus DP-EES.

32 We performed a blinded, randomized, noninferiority trial comparing iodine povacrylex-alcohol

33 he United Kingdom, we conducted a randomized noninferiority trial comparing low-dose and high-dose ra

34 conducted a 24-week randomized, open-label, noninferiority trial comparing oral mycophenolate mofeti

35 multicenter, single-blind, all-comer, 2-arm, noninferiority trial comparing the everolimus-eluting st

36 rgeons Oncology Group Z0011 trial, a phase 3 noninferiority trial conducted at 115 sites and enrollin

37 Randomized 2-arm noninferiority trial conducted at an academic medical ce

38 Randomized, open-label noninferiority trial conducted at Rahima Moosa Mother an

39 Randomized, single-blind noninferiority trial conducted between the months of Oct

40 Because testing for futility in this noninferiority trial corresponds to testing the hypothes

41 We used a noninferiority trial design with a noninferiority margin

42 point was time to recurrence, tested using a noninferiority trial design.

43 ed to growing use of composite endpoints and noninferiority trial designs in transplantation.

44 Randomized, double-blind, noninferiority trial enrolling 232 adults with recurrent

45 ulticenter, placebo-controlled, double-blind noninferiority trial enrolling 8910 overweight or obese

46 Phase III noninferiority trial examining efficacy and safety of co

47 Traditionally, noninferiority trials have required very large sample si

48 We performed a randomized noninferiority trial in 17 Dutch hospitals.

49 avidae who participated in the ISTp arm of a noninferiority trial in 4 West African countries were sc

50 We conducted a randomized, controlled noninferiority trial in Cuba.

51 ethods We conducted a multicenter randomized noninferiority trial in intermediate-risk prostate cance

52 We conducted a pragmatic, open-label, noninferiority trial in New Zealand in which 1310 adult

53 We conducted a randomized, controlled noninferiority trial in which filtered sunlight was comp

54 We conducted a 48-week, double-blind, noninferiority trial in which we randomly assigned 353 p

55 d a national, cluster-randomized, pragmatic, noninferiority trial involving 117 general surgery resid

56 TING, AND PATIENTS: Prospective, randomized, noninferiority trial involving 250 patients with unilate

57 is of a randomized, multicenter, open-label, noninferiority trial involving 4447 patients with type 2

58 In a randomized, open-label, event-driven, noninferiority trial involving 4832 patients who had acu

59 Double-blind, randomized, crossover noninferiority trial involving 501 adults with at least

60 In a single-center, double-blind, noninferiority trial involving adults with unipolar depr

61 We conducted an open-label noninferiority trial involving children 9.0 to 11.9 mont

62 This was a randomized, partially blinded, noninferiority trial involving patients with cancer with

63 Multicenter randomized, noninferiority trial involving patients with severe seps

64 We performed a randomized noninferiority trial involving women undergoing uterine

65 We performed a multicenter, randomized, noninferiority trial involving women with uncomplicated,

66 l of the resulting randomized trials--called noninferiority trials--is to establish that the novel tr

67 tort outcome interpretation, complexities of noninferiority trials, large sample sizes, and inadequat

68 This was a multicenter, open-label, noninferiority trial (margin 12%).

69 We designed a noninferiority trial (noninferiority margin, -10.5%) to

70 In this phase IIIb, multicenter, open-label, noninferiority trial, nonsurgical patients were randomiz

71 In noninferiority trials, novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs)

72 Randomized noninferiority trial of 290 children (aged 6-60 months),

73 Thus, we conducted a noninferiority trial of cisplatin and paclitaxel versus

74 was a pragmatic, patient- and rater-blinded, noninferiority trial of patients with major depression (

75 ter, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, noninferiority trial of rituximab (375 mg per square met

76 We analyzed data from a noninferiority trial of short-course antimicrobial thera

77 We conducted a randomized, noninferiority trial of stopping versus continuing daily

78 h fluconazole in a randomized, double-blind, noninferiority trial of treatment for invasive candidias

79 R 1 and DISCOVER 2 were identically designed noninferiority trials of dalbavancin for the treatment o

80 he Update Committee reviewed three phase III noninferiority trials of dosing intervals, one systemati

81 ently updated guidelines for active control, noninferiority trials of selected severe infections caus

82 Noninferiority trials often require a long follow-up per

83 r than 90% the best that can be hoped for is noninferiority trial outcomes compared with current stan

84 In a noninferiority trial, patients with genotype 2 or 3 infe

85 onducted a phase 3, open-label, multicenter, noninferiority trial that included 1271 patients between

86 ds This was a randomized, partially blinded, noninferiority trial that involved survivors of breast c

87 In a noninferiority trial, the efficacies of 10 days and 15 d

88 paper tackles related controversial issues: noninferiority trials, the value of factorial designs, t

89 On the basis of noninferiority trials, tigecycline received Food and Dru

90 spective Randomized Multicenter Single-Blind Noninferiority Trial to Assess the Safety and Performanc

91 We performed a single-blinded noninferiority trial to compare perioperative hemodynami

92 We conducted a noninferiority trial to compare the outcomes of PCI perf

93 onducted a large, randomized, multinational, noninferiority trial to determine whether similar effica

94 scent girls in Vietnam who participated in a noninferiority trial to investigate whether immune respo

95 The study was designed as a noninferiority trial to show that the difference between

96 of active-control equivalence (also known as noninferiority) trials to establish efficacy of new ther

97 en-label, multicenter, randomized controlled noninferiority trial was conducted at 6 Kenyan hospitals

98 In this multicenter, randomized, noninferiority trial, we assigned 303 very preterm infan

99 this international, multicenter, randomized, noninferiority trial, we assigned 564 preterm infants (g

100 ter, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, noninferiority trial, we compared rituximab (375 mg per

101 In this double-blind, randomized, noninferiority trial, we prospectively evaluated the eff

102 In this double-blind noninferiority trial, we randomly assigned 307 patients

103 In this open-label, noninferiority trial, we randomly assigned 440 HIV-infec

104 In this multicenter, open-label, noninferiority trial, we randomly assigned 5243 adults u

105 In this open-label, noninferiority trial, we randomly assigned patients with

106 SWiTCH was a noninferiority trial with a composite primary end point,

107 The study design was a double-blind, noninferiority trial with a prespecified noninferiority

108 multicentre, randomized, 2-arm, open-label, noninferiority trial with minimal exclusion criteria.

109 D PARTICIPANTS: Cluster randomized crossover noninferiority trial, with attending physicians as the u