P-values, survival analyses and phase II trials
1994
Critique of Chemotherapy Trial for Salivary Gland Tumors
Sample size: 16
Commentary
Evidence: low
Author Information
Author(s): P. Fayers
Primary Institution: MRC Cancer Trials Office
Conclusion
The small sample size of 16 patients in the trial makes the reported survival differences statistically insignificant and unreliable.
Supporting Evidence
- The authors' comparisons of survival are misleading due to a misunderstanding of P-values.
- The small sample size means any observed differences could be due to chance.
- The early termination of the trial renders the randomised comparison worthless.
Takeaway
The study didn't have enough patients to really know if one treatment was better than the other, so we can't trust the results.
Methodology
The commentary critiques the methodology of a phase II trial, highlighting issues with sample size and statistical analysis.
Potential Biases
The analysis may be biased due to the lack of statistical oversight.
Limitations
The trial was terminated early, which undermines the validity of the randomised comparisons.
Statistical Information
Statistical Significance
not significant
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website