Application of non-inferiority testing in microhardness and its relationship to erosion: Relevance for hard tissue...

To use non-inferiority statistical testing with simple microhardness measurements (SMH) as a prediction of potential erosive hard tissue damage of topical treatments on enamel.

Three independent experiments of a simple acid cycling demineralization (ACD) model were used to screen softening effects of various commercial beverages on dental enamel. The cycling model consists of six repeated exposures of enamel slabs with alternating treatments of artificial saliva over the course of 6 hours. After six repeated cycles, effects on surface microhardness were measured. Softening effects of beverages were evaluated using a statistical non-inferiority test of the positive control (water) and negative control (1% citric acid). To confirm whether softening effects as evaluated by a non-inferiority test translated to like differences in enamel erosion susceptibility, selected beverages then underwent more complex erosion cycling model (ECM) evaluation where enamel blocks were cycled with beverages (vs. historically established citric acid) and pooled saliva over a period of 5 days. The ECM also incorporated dentifrice treatments, sodium fluoride (NaF, Crest Cavity Protection, negative control) and a positive control stannous fluoride dentifrice (SnF₂, Crest Pro-Health Advanced), to confirm model performance against historically published results of in situ erosion protection benefits of SnF₂.

There was a spectrum of softening properties of 16 commercial beverages in the ACD test, ranging from a ΔSMH of -22.6 to -316 vs. baseline. Four beverages were evaluated further in ECM testing. Despite a measurable change in SMH, Sprite and beer treatments in the ACD passed the statistical non-inferiority test and both were evaluated in erosion cycling, showing no enamel surface loss. Vinegar (~5% acetic acid) and Gatorade also showed measurable changes in SMH in the ACD, but they failed statistical non-inferiority testing. Both beverages subsequently showed significant enamel tissue loss (erosion) in further erosion cycling testing. This combined set of data suggests that simple surface microhardness evaluation may be used as a proxy for potential erosion surface loss if properly quantified. SnF₂ dentifrice significantly reduced erosion from all erosive beverages with greater efficacy than NaF control dentifrice, consistent with prior clinical and in vitro evidence.

The ACD model with application of non-inferiority statistical testing is proposed as a simple model of hard tissue safety assessment of treatments, including oral hygiene products. Products that pass the non-inferiority test in ACD (surface softening) are proposed as safe for enamel as there is no suggestion from this data that teeth are at risk of tissue loss due to these products. On the other hand, products failing the non-inferiority test require confirmatory safety qualification in erosion cycling. Products equal or worse than citric acid with ACD or with significant erosion in ECM are suggested to warrant reformulation unless favorable safety data for enamel (lack of erosion) or the appropriate justification are provided.