A new example of semantic shift: from non-inferior to more beneficial.

The MGEN mutual insurance company invites its members to take part in MyPeBS through its website. Once again (see news of 19/07/21) MyPeBS is presented as a study aimed at demonstrating the superiority of an individualized screening over the current screening.

According to the MyPeBS website « MyPeBS is a clinical study...that aims to compare whether personalized screening...would benefit women more than the current standard screening ».
This MyPeBS presentation is false because the goal of MyPeBS is not to demonstrate an improvement in screening with personalization based on individual risk factors, but rather to demonstrate that personalization does not reduce screening effectiveness by more than 25%. This is a long way from demonstrating that personalized screening is « more beneficial » than current screening.
It is certainly difficult to "sell" a non-inferiority study, and even more difficult to explain to women how demonstrating that personalized screening does not perform worse than standard screening will advance breast cancer care. Furthermore, it is perplexing to consider that a loss of effectiveness is insignificant if it does not exceed 25%.
Nonetheless, one cannot simply write whatever comes to mind! MyPeBS's promoters have decided to conduct a non-inferiority study. Whatever the reasons for this choice, it must be assumed, and MyPeBS must be presented as what it is: a non-inferiority study with a -25 percent non-inferiority threshold.

---

Dernière mise à jour le 06/10/2021