abstract
- Clinical trials are essential for establishing the benefits and harms of various treatments. Among the various trial designs, superiority trials aim to establish the superiority of one treatment over another, while noninferiority trials demonstrate that a new treatment is not inferior to an established one while minimizing harms or patient burdens. In recent years, noninferiority trials have gained prominence. This mini-review explores noninferiority trials, focusing on challenges in their interpretation. Ultimately, we argue that the focus should be on the results from trials rather than their design, as clinicians and other stakeholders primarily seek evidence that helps patients and clinicians in trade-offs of the benefits and harms and burdens of treatment options. PATIENT SUMMARY: Our mini-review shows that looking at the overall treatment benefits and harms in noninferiority trials is better than focusing on the trial design. This approach would help patients and clinicians to better understand trial results and their implications.