DESIGN AND EXECUTION OF EARLY PHASE ADAPTIVE CLINICAL TRIALS
|
|
- Rose Webb
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 DESIGN AND EXECUTION OF EARLY PHASE ADAPTIVE CLINICAL TRIALS Maximising R&D Efficiency and Productivity An Aptiv Solutions White Paper
2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The adoption of an adaptive design strategy across the product development process brings a number of important benefits. These include enhanced R&D efficiency, enhanced R&D productivity and, importantly, increased probability of success at phase III. The opportunity to manage risk starts in the early phase of a development programme, with a diligent view to appropriate dose selection which impacts not only the success of the downstream clinical trial programme, but also manufacturing costs and value analyses. Adaptive design trials enhance R&D efficiency by reducing the need to repeat trials that just miss their clinical end-point or fail to identify the effective dose response at the first attempt. By avoiding the need to run these trials again, significant cost and time savings are achieved. This is possible through use of adaptive designs that enable additional patients to be added to achieve statistical significance the first time around or by allowing a wider dose range to be studied and then picking doses early in the trial that are in the optimum part of the dose response curve. In addition, early stopping of development programmes because a product is ineffective enables scarce resources to be redeployed in additional trials which may show more promise. All of these factors increase development efficiency. Adaptive designs increase R&D productivity by enabling more accurate definition of the effective dose response at phase II which enables better design of the pivotal phase III programme which in turn increases the probability of success of the overall development programme. A number of phase III trials fail because the dose is either too high and causes unwanted safety issues or is too low to show sufficient efficacy. Adaptive design trials enable optimized dose selection before the pivotal trial phase is started. Another opportunity provided by adaptive design is population enrichment where drug response can be PAGE 1 optimised to specific patient sub-populations that respond better to treatment. Many phase III studies fail because the overall efficacy of treatment is diluted as a consequence of the drug being evaluated in the full trial population rather than in the specific subset where the drug works best. Adaptive design enables early selection of the appropriate patient population and increases the probability of success. Adaptive Design Enables Selection of the Right Dose for the Right Patient Before Commitment to Expensive Phase III Trials Phases I and II are critical steps in the clinical development process as this is where important information about the product has to be generated and assessed before the decision is taken to commit to expensive phase III pivotal studies. This early phase of development is known as the Learn Phase and the data generated relates to the effective dose-response, the safety profile and therapeutic index, appropriate endpoints, and the patient population best treated by the product under evaluation. Adaptive designs have an important role to play in both phase I and phase II, but it is in the latter phase where they add the greatest value in terms of risk management. Validated methodologies are available to design early phase adaptive trials and this is an area of significant interest across the pharmaceutical industry. candidate optimisation to Proof of concept stages. Moira assists partner companies with both acquisition and due diligence of in licensed compounds and strategic support for the out-licensing of successful candidates. This has included design, planning and management of, strategic and clinical development plans, due diligence, decision analysis, preclinical, POC and Phase II programmes in a range of, indications including respiratory, anti-infective, immunomodulation, CNS and cardiovascular. This experience covers a large range of targets and mechanisms of action. In order to support the strategic and clinical development planning Moira has worked extensively with international Key Opinion Leaders in respiratory, anti-infective and transplant indications. PHIL BIRCH, SVP, CORPORATE BRAND MANAGER Dr. Phil Birch is a Senior Vice President at Aptiv Solutions and has global responsibility for co-ordinating market education and client awareness in the adaptive clinical trials field. Dr. Birch has worked in the pharmaceutical industry for over 27 years and has held executive positions in corporate development, business development and R&D in a number of consulting, biotechnology and top 10 pharmaceutical companies. Getting it Right at Phase II is a Major Objective for Adaptive Design and is the Point at which Phase III Success is Defined Companies that adopt a comprehensive adaptive design strategy in the Learn phase will make better development decisions, will build development efficiency, will increase the probability of success of the molecules that enter phase III, ultimately bringing effective products to the market more efficiently. Competitor companies that persevere with conventional trial designs will remain slow, inefficient PAGE 10
3 REFERENCES ABOUT THE AUTHORS 1. VLAD DRAGALIN, SVP, INNOVATION CENTRE PAGE 9 Dragalin V. Adaptive Designs: Terminology and Classification. Drug Information Journal, 2006; 40: Gallo P, Chuang-Stein C, Dragalin V, Gaydos B, Krams M, Pinheiro J. Executive Summary of the PhRMA Working Group on Adaptive Designs in Clinical Drug Development. J Biopharmaceutical Statistics 2006; 16: Matano A, Bayesian Adaptive Designs for Phase I Oncology Trials, Clinical Operations Summit, Brussels, 2012). Dragalin V, Hsuan F, and Padmanabhan SK. Adaptive Designs for Dose-Finding Studies Based on Sigmoid Emax Model. J Biopharmaceutical Statistics 2007; 17: Smith MK, Jones I, Morris MF, Grieve A and Tan K. Implementation of a Bayesian adaptive design in a proof of concept study. Pharmaceutical Statistics 2006; 5: Bornkamp B, Bretz F, Dmitrienko A, Enas G, Gaydos B, Hsu CH, König F, Krams M, Liu Q, Neuenschwander B, Parke T, Pinheiro J, Roy A, Sax R, Shen F. Innovative approaches for designing and analyzing adaptive dose-ranging trials: White Paper from the PhRMA working group on Adaptive Dose-Ranging Studies. J of Biopharmaceutical Statistics 2007; 17: Dragalin V, Bornkamp B, Bretz F, Miller F, Padmanabhan SK, Patel N, Perevozskaya I, Pinheiro J, and Smith J. A Simulation Study to Compare New Adaptive Dose Ranging Designs. Statistics in Biopharmaceutical Research 2010; 2: Orloff J, Douglas F, Pinheiro J, Levinson S, Branson M, Chaturvedi P, Ette E, Gallo P, Hirsch G, Mehta C, Patel N, Sabir S, Springs S, Stanski D, Golub H, Evers M, Fleming E, Singh N, Tramontin T. The future of drug development: advancing clinical trial design. Nature Review-Drug Discovery. 2009; 8: Padmanabhan SK and Dragalin V. Adaptive Dc-optimal designs for dose finding based on a continuous efficacy endpoint. Biometrical Journal 2010; 52: Grieve AP and Krams M. ASTIN: a Bayesian adaptive dose-response trial in acute stroke. Clinical Trials 2005; 2: Bornkamp B, Pinheiro J, Bretz F. MCPMod: An R Package for the Design and Analysis of Dose-Finding Studies. Journal of Statistical Software 2009; 29:1-23. Shen J, Preskorn S, Dragalin V, Slomkowski M, Padmanabhan SK, Fardipour P, Sharma A, and Krams M. How Adaptive Trial Designs Can Increase Efficiency in Psychiatric Drug Development: A Case Study. Innovations in Clinical Neuroscience 2011; 8: Berry SM, Spinelli W, Littman GS, Liang JZ, Fardipour P, Berry DA, Lewis RL, and Krams M. A Bayesian dose-finding trial with adaptive dose expansion to flexibly assess efficacy and safety of an investigational drug. Clinical Trials 2010; 7: Dr. Vlad Dragalin is a well-known adaptive design expert with 25 years of experience in developing the statistical methodology of adaptive designs and with over 12 years experience in pharmaceutical industry. Vlad is a Senior Vice President, Software Development and Consulting, in the Innovation Center at Aptiv Solutions. Vlad works with clients to improve the drug development process through the use of adaptive designs and to assist them with the trial design, simulation and execution, developing adaptive trials software tools, and working with project teams in clinical operations, data management and statistics during study conduct. SARAH ARBE-BARNES, SVP, TRANSLATIONAL SCIENCES Dr. Sarah Arbe-Barnes has over 24 years of experience in drug development and project leadership in the Pharma and service sector industry to include in/outlicensing and due diligence, strategic development and business planning, fundraising for startups/smes( not-for-profit sector and VC), along with optimized market access strategies and marketing. Sarah has led recent product approval programmes, overseeing a broad range of clinical and nonclinical project design and management activities from the point of candidate selection. Sarah heads the Translational Sciences division of Aptiv Solutions, which is a dedicated global consultancy group, focused on the provision of drug and device development advice and expertise for small molecules and biologics. MOIRA THOMSON, VP, TRANSLATIONAL SCIENCES Moira Thomson has over 15 years of experience in the Pharmaceutical Industry, and is involved in the design, planning and management of global development projects for a mixture of small and medium sized Pharma, and Biotech companies covering lead and will fail to make the commercial returns that investors and shareholders demand. Adaptive Design Builds Competitive Advantage This White Paper summarizes the important aspects of early phase adaptive design and provides a summary of selected case studies which demonstrate the value of this innovative approach. It has been written to inform senior R&D decision-makers about the critical role of adaptive design in early phase development and the significant benefits that this approach can bring. BACKGROUND TO EARLY PHASE ADAPTIVE TRIAL DESIGN Adaptive Clinical Trials are viewed as supporting a change in the development process as focus moves from blockbuster products to more specialized medicines that require a flexible cost-efficient approach to investigating their effectiveness. Adaptive designs are statistical methodologies applied to specific stages of drug development where real time learning from accumulating trial data is applied to optimize subsequent study execution.1 The benefit of an Adaptive Clinical Trial lies in the monitoring of data to make design modification adjustments to an aspect of a trial leading to quicker development decisions around key go/no-go milestones that impact time to market and/or minimise costly R&D losses. The adaptations are prospectively defined prior to the start of the trial and can include stopping early either for futility or success, expanding the sample size due to greater than expected data variability, or allocating patients preferentially to treatment regimens with a better therapeutic index. Virtually any aspect of the trial may be the potential target of design modifications. Importantly, these modifications are a design feature aimed to enhance the trial, not a remedy for inadequate planning. They are not ad hoc study corrections made via protocol amendment.2 The specific adaptations considered, and the basis of their implementation, are carefully defined based on strict rules, justified statistically and scientifically, and are an integral part of the final, pre-recruitment trial protocol. Failing this would compromise the interpretation and acceptance of study results. Adaptive designs often employ frequent interim analyses of all accumulated data (and, possibly, external trial data) to determine whether pre-planned design modifications will be triggered. Interim analyses partition the trial into multiple stages, each trial stage s characteristics (number of arms, number of patients to be enrolled, their allocation between arms, stage duration, etc.) defined by the preceding interim analysis results. The ability to periodically, or even continually, examine available data to determine whether trial modifications are necessary and implement pre-defined design changes when indicated, gives adaptive design its strength and flexibility. The use of adaptive design in the exploratory stage of clinical trials can increase the efficiency of drug development by improving our ability to efficiently learn about the dose-response and better determine whether to take a drug (and the right dose of the drug and in the right population) forward into later phase testing. These designs explicitly address multiple trial goals, adaptively allocate subjects according to ongoing information needs, and allow termination for both early success and futility considerations. This approach can maximize the ability to test a larger number of doses in a single trial while simultaneously increasing the efficiency of the trial in terms of making better go/no-go decisions about continuing the trial and/or the development of the drug for a specific indication or sub-population. During the Learn phase many aspects of the study design can be modified: number of subjects, study duration, endpoint selection, treatment duration, number of treatments, patient population. The adaptation of multiple trial features that are a legitimate concern in confirmatory studies can become, in fact, an PAGE 2
4 The Use of Adaptive Design in the Learn Phase Offers the Best Opportunity to Assess the Product Characteristics that Determine Success Judicious use of adaptive designs may increase the information value per resource unit invested by avoiding allocation of patients to nonefficacious/unsafe therapies and allowing stopping decisions to be made at the earliest possible time point. Ultimately this will accelerate the development of promising therapies to benefit patients. Adaptive Clinical Trials can result in the more ethical treatment of patients from at least two perspectives. First, a larger number of patients can be randomized to more favorable, effective doses with fewer patients exposed to less effective doses. In addition, there is the potential for including fewer total patients in the early stages of the development programmes with attending lower risk of exposure to adverse events. A greater saving in patients may be obtained at the programme level rather than the individual study level as adaptive methodology applied across a programme will reduce the need to repeat ineffective or inconclusive studies. Adaptive designs represent an advanced methodology to support drug development. A prerequisite for their successful implementation is an understanding of the underlying methodology and their impact on the logistics of the trial, such as data management and monitoring procedures, electronic data capture/interactive web response services, drug supply management, and data-monitoring committee operating procedures. These designs have an impact on drug development strategies, trial protocols, clinical trial material doses and availability, informed consent forms, data analysis, and reporting plans. Adaptive design will also change the dynamics of PAGE 3 enrollment, randomization, and data capturing process, monitoring, and data cleaning systems. To be able to make informed decisions, the sponsor must have access to real time clinical data from all sources and be able to easily review and assess this data. Strategy Clinical Trial Development Programme This in turn requires flexibility through: Data management systems for rapid clinical data access and data cleaning Drug supply systems for drug product planning and management Optimal systems providing randomization, medication kit management and emergency unblinding Planning of Adaptive Clinical Trials is a key feature in the success of such innovative approaches. Determining the optimal characteristics of the study design can be a complex yet critical decision that may require more upfront planning before the protocol can be finalized. However, there are several commercial software packages that provide a powerful tool for planning, simulation and analysis of complex adaptive designs. FACTS is comprehensive software for adaptive designs in the Learn phase and includes early stage dose-escalation designs, adaptive dose-ranging studies, interim decision rules based on both efficacy and safety responses, and population enrichment. ADDPLAN is a validated software package for adaptive design in the Confirm phase and incorporates sample size re-estimation, adaptive group sequential designs, multiple comparison procedures for multi-armed adaptive trials, including treatment selection designs, flexible combination of clinical research phases, and population enrichment designs. Development Pipeline Benefits Value of adopting an adaptive strategy appealing feature of adaptive designs in exploratory development, leading to enhanced learning to set the appropriate stage for confirmatory trials. Trial Efficiency Better decision-making More information per $ invested Increased probability of success at Phase III Pipeline efficiency and productivity FIGURE 5: Adaptive Design Creates Value at Level of the Single Trial, Development Programme and Product Pipeline This aspect is discussed further in an accompanying white paper that explores the strategic utilisation of adaptive design at the development programme and product pipeline level. Importantly, recent data from Merck has indicated that adoption of an early phase adaptive trial strategy at this level saves at least $200m annually (Schindler J, Disruptive Innovations Conference, Boston, 2012). TYPES OF ADAPTIVE DESIGNS IN LEARN STUDIES Examples of adaptive designs in the Learn phase are shown in Figure 1. Phase I studies are already PAGE 8
5 Adaptive Dose Ranging Studies Build Significant Efficiencies at Phase II and Optimize Identification of the Optimal Dose for Confirmatory Studies Several adaptive designs have been proposed and some already applied in practice using different working models for the design engine: parsimonious monotonic sigmoid Emax9, Normal Dynamic Linear Model without monotonicity restrictions10, several simple models combined in a Multiple Comparison Procedure (MCP Mod).11 CASE STUDY The objective of this trial was to establish the correct dose(s) to take forward into a confirmatory trial on a novel anti-psychotic drug in acute schizophrenia. There was data indicating that the dose-response might be non-monotonic. Therefore, the working model chosen for the design was the Normal Dynamic Linear Model, because it is flexible and robust, and also allows for capturing non-monotonic relationships. Patients were allocated to placebo, active comparator and seven doses of study drug. The adaptive allocation was targeting both the minimum efficacious dose (MED) and the dose achieving the maximum response (Dmax) on the primary endpoint, positive PANSS score at week 4. Weekly data updates were used to change the allocation and check early stopping rules based on predictive probabilities. A stopping rule for futility was based on a prespecified threshold that no treatment dose achieves the clinically significant difference (CSD) over placebo. A stopping rule for efficacy required sufficient knowledge about the MED and Dmax and a prespecified confidence that the Dmax achieves CSD. For details, see Shen et al.12 The adaptive design allowed earlier (5 months) decision making with a 99% confidence in futility decision with $14m savings in direct grant cost. The design, implementation, and outcome of a response adaptive dose-ranging trial of an investigational drug in patients with diabetes, incorporating a PAGE 7 dose expansion approach to flexibly address both efficacy and safety has also been reported recently by Berry et al.13 The early (2 months) futility decision was achieved with a $3.6m saving in direct cost and additional cost savings in avoiding expensive production of phase III drug supplies. Therapeutic Area Adaptive Design Trial Outcome Metrics Rheumatoid Arthritis Adaptive combined Multiple Ascending Dose and Proof of Concept Study Successful trial criteria met for the achievement of clinical POC in Rheumatoid Arthritis Programme accelerated by 9-month; $1.2m saving by combining two trials in one Post-Operative Nausea & Vomiting Proof of concept and adaptive dose-ranging study design Early stopping for futility $0.5m savings and redeployment of resource Post-Herpetic Neuralgia Proof of concept and adaptive dose-ranging study design Early stopping for futility $2m savings and re-deployment of resource Schizophrenia Adaptive dose-ranging Early stopping for futility $14m savings and re-deployment of resource FIGURE 4: Summary of Early Phase Case Studies SUMMARY Early phase adaptive design trials address a number of critical development questions that need to be answered before commitment is made to phase III confirmatory trials. The application of these innovative designs early in the product development process enhances clinical trial efficiency, productivity and increases the probability of success at phase III. The deployment of these approaches across a pipeline of products brings substantial benefits to sponsor companies and enables more effective portfolio management and ultimately increases portfolio value (Figure 5). adaptive by nature, but more recent adaptive designs provide better estimate of drug safety (e.g. the maximum tolerated dose) and better understanding of its PK/PD characteristics. Combining the objectives of conventional Phase IIa and IIb studies in a single trial provides the obvious benefit of reducing the timeline by running the two studies seamlessly under a single protocol with the same clinical team. Furthermore, such approaches achieve trial efficiency by the prospective integration of data from both IIa and IIb in the final analysis. assessment of proof-of-mechanism in the very first study conducted with the investigational compound. The ability to assess proof-of-mechanism in this early developmental setting provides an opportunity to greatly enhance the clinical development strategy for the compound. The adaptation is intended to quickly hone in on the predicted dose-range of interest. This avoids the risks associated with exposing patients in an ineffective low dose range, whilst minimizing exposure to high doses with an unacceptable tolerability and safety profile. FIRST-IN-HUMAN SINGLE ASCENDING DOSE ESCALATION DESIGNS CRM Offers a Better Approach to Accurately Determining the MTD in Early Phase Oncology Studies In contrast to traditional dose escalation designs, where for example, cohorts of subjects are allocated to ascending doses (and placebo) until a maximum tolerated dose (MTD) is empirically determined, the continual reassessment method (CRM) models the dose- and/or exposure-toxicity relationship to focus on the identification of the dose-range of interest near the MTD and for this to be explored further. These adaptive dose escalation designs can be expanded to also efficiently establish proof-of-mechanism or proof-of-target modulation, if validated biomarker endpoints are available. CRM models are becoming routine for early phase oncology studies where accurate definition of the MTD is critical for selecting the optimum dose for efficacy assessment. Conventional 3+3 designs have been shown to significantly underestimate the MTD which increases the risk of poor outcome in efficacy trials.3 SEAMLESS MULTIPLE ASCENDING DOSE AND PROOF-OF-CONCEPT STUDY DESIGNS The objective of seamless multiple ascending dose and proof-of-concept studies is to combine a multiple ascending dose (MAD) study in patients with the proof-of-concept of the investigational compound. First-in Human Single ascending dose escalation designs Up-and-Down and CRM to find MTD Establish Proof-of-Mechanism or Proof-of-Target Modulation MAD and PoC Two-stage adaptive approach in patients 1st stage to identify MTD 2nd stage to select dose and exposure levels (necessary cond.) PoC and ADRS Start with the highest feasible tolerated dose and placebo If a pre-specified futility condition is satisfied > stop Otherwise, open enrollment to lower doses CASE STUDY Seamless Phase I/II Design SAD or MAD combined with Biomaker-based Efficacy To identify the Optimal Safe Dose Adaptive Dose Ranging Design Finding a target dose (MED, EDp) Response Adaptive Allocation Covariate Adjusted Response Adaptive Allocation A good example is seen in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. The study design involved a MAD escalation study, in which patients were randomly assigned only to the lowest treatment group or placebo in a 3:1 ratio (active treatment or placebo) which then converted into a parallel enrolling, proof of concept (POC) dose ranging study (see Figure 2). Consistent with the MAD paradigm, dose escalation (allowing subjects in the next higher dose level to CRM: Continual Reassessment Method; MTD: Maximum Tolerated Dose; MAD: Multiple Ascending Dose; SAD: Single Ascending Dose; MED: Minimum Effective Dose; EDp: Dose achieving 100p% of maximum effect FIGURE 1: Types of Adaptive Designs in the Learn Phase The traditional First in Human study objectives of safety and tolerability can be extended to include an PAGE 4
6 This adaptive design provides several advantages over more traditional clinical trial approaches, without compromising patient safety: The seamless design increased the utility of the information obtained by allowing subjects in both the MAD and POC stages to provide both definitive safety and efficacy data. Performing the MAD component in subjects with rheumatoid arthritis receiving concomitant methotrexate allowed for the earliest characterization of safety and antigenicity of the new compound in the clinically relevant population. The adaptive design minimized the number of subjects that were exposed to ineffective doses of the drug, while simultaneously focusing subjects to doses that were most informative for accurate dose selection for subsequent confirmatory trials. PAGE 5 STAGE 2 Ascending MAD Until doses are open Safety Decision: Subjects will receive a 2nd dose only after a safety review of the 2nd dose in the preceding cohort. 2nd Stage begins after escalating to the maximum tolerated dose N=33 patients for each of five doses (10, 30, 50, 60, 100 mg) and Placebo The dose regimen is Q4 Weeks for 4 cycles. Cohort 5: 100mg (n=3) STAGE 1 receive a second dose) occurred only after the safety review on 6 subjects assigned to active treatment in the preceding dose had been performed. This safety review was undertaken by a data monitoring committee. Only after it was determined by the data monitoring committee that two consecutive doses of the experimental treatment were well tolerated at a given dose level, were subjects already enrolled in the next higher dose treatment group permitted to receive a second dose of the investigational product. In Stage 2, a utility combining biomarker observations with early readout of a clinical endpoint at week 4 was used to drop dose levels that did not fulfil prespecified necessary conditions (Proof-of-Non-Viability). Viable cohorts and comparator were kept open until each of the surviving treatment arms reached a predefined number of patients. The endpoint to assess proof-of-concept was a 12 week observation on the regulatory accepted endpoint for Rheumatoid Arthritis (ACR20). Cohort 4: 60mg (n=3) Cohort 3: 50mg (n=3) Cohort 2: 30mg (n=3) Cohort 1: 10mg (n=3) Futility Decision: Based on ACR20 and 25% reduction in CRP at 4 weeks Internal DMC for safety & futility decisions: Unblinded Medical Monitor Unblinded Biostatistion FIGURE 2: Trial Design for Seamless MAD/POC Case Study Therefore, the adaptive design optimizes the benefit/risk balance for participating subjects via improved efficiency of decision making in relation to the doses of the new drug studied. In this example the estimated cost saving through combining two trials into one was $1.2m and the development programme was accelerated by 9 months. The Development Programme was Accelerated by 9 Months and the Cost Saving of Combining Two Trials in One was Estimated at $1.2M the top dose of study drug could not achieve a minimal acceptable level of total pain relief at 8 hours. If the study continues to the second stage, additional subjects would be randomized to placebo, active control, and three doses of the new drug (low, medium, and high) in a 1:1:2:2:1 ratio. Again, the study could be stopped due to lack of assay sensitivity or futility. Otherwise, a D-optimal design will be used to determine both the doses of the new drug (among six possible) and subject allocation ratios for the third stage, see Figure 3. At the end of the study, a four parameter logistic model is used to fit the dose response and make recommendations about the dose to be taken in phase III. Stage I DRG 900mg DRG 750mg Stage II Futility DRG 900mg DRG 750mg DRG 600mg DRG 600mg DRG 450mg DRG 450mg IA 1 DRG 300mg DRG 300mg DRG 150mg DRG 150mg Plbo NAS Plbo Ctrl Ctrl Total Ssize ~ 30: 10 pats/arm Total Ssize ~ 65: 5:10 pats/arm Stage III Futility Fit the Model Find the D-Optimal Design Determine Sample Size IA II NAS FIGURE 3: Trial Design for POC and Adaptive Dose-Ranging Case Study PROOF OF CONCEPT AND DOSE-RANGING STUDY DESIGNS CASE STUDY An example of a proof of concept and dose-ranging study design is a dose-finding study to evaluate the analgesic efficacy and safety of a single dose of a new non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug in subjects experiencing pain after oral dental surgery.4 Six doses of the new drug, placebo and an active comparator are considered. The adaptive design consists of three stages. At the first stage, subjects are equally randomized into three arms: placebo, active comparator, and the top dose of the new drug. At the first interim analysis, the study may be stopped either because of lack of assay sensitivity, i.e. inability to establish a predefined minimal benefit of the comparator over and above placebo, or evidence that A full case study has been published in the pain field where a Bayesian adaptive dose ranging design was used to evaluate the efficacy of a new analgesic drug in a proof-of-concept post-herpetic neuralgia trial.5 In total 7 doses of the drug were evaluated in an attempt to define the effective dose response curve. The maximum sample size was 280 patients, however, at the first interim analysis (80 patients) the study was stopped for futility as none of the doses showed any meaningful difference from placebo. The study was formally stopped after 133 patients had been enrolled. Stopping of this trial saved an estimated direct grant cost of $0.76m with a further $1.3m savings in internal costs. Early Stopping of POC Trials Because of Lack of Efficacy Saves Significant Cost and Enables Valuable Resources to be Re-assigned to Alternative Programmes That May Have a Better Chance of Success A recent unpublished example shows that early stopping of a POC adaptive dose ranging trial in post-operative nausea and vomiting saved $0.5m in outsourced costs. In this example, 131 out of 200 patients had been enrolled when the decision was taken at the first interim analysis. RESPONSE ADAPTIVE DOSE-RANGING STUDY DESIGNS Recent simulation studies6,7 conducted by the PhRMA Working Group on Adaptive Dose-Ranging Studies have found that response-adaptive dose allocation designs are generally superior in performance to conventional pairwise comparisons approaches. Learning about the research question such as identifying a target dose, or estimating the dose-response, is optimized with these designs. The main objectives in an adaptive dose-ranging study are to detect the dose response, to determine if any doses(s) meets clinical relevance, to estimate the dose-response, and then to decide on the dose(s) (if any) to take into the confirmatory Phase III. With adaptive designs for dose-ranging studies many more doses may be considered than in a conventional parallel group design without increasing sample size. This is achieved mainly through an adaptive allocation rule that is changing the randomization ratio to different treatment arms during the study and putting more subjects in the region that allow most accurate estimation of dose-response and better precision in selecting the target dose. For example, Orloff et al.8 showed that for half the sample size, the adaptive design is as powerful and efficient as the standard approach. PAGE 6
7 This adaptive design provides several advantages over more traditional clinical trial approaches, without compromising patient safety: The seamless design increased the utility of the information obtained by allowing subjects in both the MAD and POC stages to provide both definitive safety and efficacy data. Performing the MAD component in subjects with rheumatoid arthritis receiving concomitant methotrexate allowed for the earliest characterization of safety and antigenicity of the new compound in the clinically relevant population. The adaptive design minimized the number of subjects that were exposed to ineffective doses of the drug, while simultaneously focusing subjects to doses that were most informative for accurate dose selection for subsequent confirmatory trials. PAGE 5 STAGE 2 Ascending MAD Until doses are open Safety Decision: Subjects will receive a 2nd dose only after a safety review of the 2nd dose in the preceding cohort. 2nd Stage begins after escalating to the maximum tolerated dose N=33 patients for each of five doses (10, 30, 50, 60, 100 mg) and Placebo The dose regimen is Q4 Weeks for 4 cycles. Cohort 5: 100mg (n=3) STAGE 1 receive a second dose) occurred only after the safety review on 6 subjects assigned to active treatment in the preceding dose had been performed. This safety review was undertaken by a data monitoring committee. Only after it was determined by the data monitoring committee that two consecutive doses of the experimental treatment were well tolerated at a given dose level, were subjects already enrolled in the next higher dose treatment group permitted to receive a second dose of the investigational product. In Stage 2, a utility combining biomarker observations with early readout of a clinical endpoint at week 4 was used to drop dose levels that did not fulfil prespecified necessary conditions (Proof-of-Non-Viability). Viable cohorts and comparator were kept open until each of the surviving treatment arms reached a predefined number of patients. The endpoint to assess proof-of-concept was a 12 week observation on the regulatory accepted endpoint for Rheumatoid Arthritis (ACR20). Cohort 4: 60mg (n=3) Cohort 3: 50mg (n=3) Cohort 2: 30mg (n=3) Cohort 1: 10mg (n=3) Futility Decision: Based on ACR20 and 25% reduction in CRP at 4 weeks Internal DMC for safety & futility decisions: Unblinded Medical Monitor Unblinded Biostatistion FIGURE 2: Trial Design for Seamless MAD/POC Case Study Therefore, the adaptive design optimizes the benefit/risk balance for participating subjects via improved efficiency of decision making in relation to the doses of the new drug studied. In this example the estimated cost saving through combining two trials into one was $1.2m and the development programme was accelerated by 9 months. The Development Programme was Accelerated by 9 Months and the Cost Saving of Combining Two Trials in One was Estimated at $1.2M the top dose of study drug could not achieve a minimal acceptable level of total pain relief at 8 hours. If the study continues to the second stage, additional subjects would be randomized to placebo, active control, and three doses of the new drug (low, medium, and high) in a 1:1:2:2:1 ratio. Again, the study could be stopped due to lack of assay sensitivity or futility. Otherwise, a D-optimal design will be used to determine both the doses of the new drug (among six possible) and subject allocation ratios for the third stage, see Figure 3. At the end of the study, a four parameter logistic model is used to fit the dose response and make recommendations about the dose to be taken in phase III. Stage I DRG 900mg DRG 750mg Stage II Futility DRG 900mg DRG 750mg DRG 600mg DRG 600mg DRG 450mg DRG 450mg IA 1 DRG 300mg DRG 300mg DRG 150mg DRG 150mg Plbo NAS Plbo Ctrl Ctrl Total Ssize ~ 30: 10 pats/arm Total Ssize ~ 65: 5:10 pats/arm Stage III Futility Fit the Model Find the D-Optimal Design Determine Sample Size IA II NAS FIGURE 3: Trial Design for POC and Adaptive Dose-Ranging Case Study PROOF OF CONCEPT AND DOSE-RANGING STUDY DESIGNS CASE STUDY An example of a proof of concept and dose-ranging study design is a dose-finding study to evaluate the analgesic efficacy and safety of a single dose of a new non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug in subjects experiencing pain after oral dental surgery.4 Six doses of the new drug, placebo and an active comparator are considered. The adaptive design consists of three stages. At the first stage, subjects are equally randomized into three arms: placebo, active comparator, and the top dose of the new drug. At the first interim analysis, the study may be stopped either because of lack of assay sensitivity, i.e. inability to establish a predefined minimal benefit of the comparator over and above placebo, or evidence that A full case study has been published in the pain field where a Bayesian adaptive dose ranging design was used to evaluate the efficacy of a new analgesic drug in a proof-of-concept post-herpetic neuralgia trial.5 In total 7 doses of the drug were evaluated in an attempt to define the effective dose response curve. The maximum sample size was 280 patients, however, at the first interim analysis (80 patients) the study was stopped for futility as none of the doses showed any meaningful difference from placebo. The study was formally stopped after 133 patients had been enrolled. Stopping of this trial saved an estimated direct grant cost of $0.76m with a further $1.3m savings in internal costs. Early Stopping of POC Trials Because of Lack of Efficacy Saves Significant Cost and Enables Valuable Resources to be Re-assigned to Alternative Programmes That May Have a Better Chance of Success A recent unpublished example shows that early stopping of a POC adaptive dose ranging trial in post-operative nausea and vomiting saved $0.5m in outsourced costs. In this example, 131 out of 200 patients had been enrolled when the decision was taken at the first interim analysis. RESPONSE ADAPTIVE DOSE-RANGING STUDY DESIGNS Recent simulation studies6,7 conducted by the PhRMA Working Group on Adaptive Dose-Ranging Studies have found that response-adaptive dose allocation designs are generally superior in performance to conventional pairwise comparisons approaches. Learning about the research question such as identifying a target dose, or estimating the dose-response, is optimized with these designs. The main objectives in an adaptive dose-ranging study are to detect the dose response, to determine if any doses(s) meets clinical relevance, to estimate the dose-response, and then to decide on the dose(s) (if any) to take into the confirmatory Phase III. With adaptive designs for dose-ranging studies many more doses may be considered than in a conventional parallel group design without increasing sample size. This is achieved mainly through an adaptive allocation rule that is changing the randomization ratio to different treatment arms during the study and putting more subjects in the region that allow most accurate estimation of dose-response and better precision in selecting the target dose. For example, Orloff et al.8 showed that for half the sample size, the adaptive design is as powerful and efficient as the standard approach. PAGE 6
8 Adaptive Dose Ranging Studies Build Significant Efficiencies at Phase II and Optimize Identification of the Optimal Dose for Confirmatory Studies Several adaptive designs have been proposed and some already applied in practice using different working models for the design engine: parsimonious monotonic sigmoid Emax9, Normal Dynamic Linear Model without monotonicity restrictions10, several simple models combined in a Multiple Comparison Procedure (MCP Mod).11 CASE STUDY The objective of this trial was to establish the correct dose(s) to take forward into a confirmatory trial on a novel anti-psychotic drug in acute schizophrenia. There was data indicating that the dose-response might be non-monotonic. Therefore, the working model chosen for the design was the Normal Dynamic Linear Model, because it is flexible and robust, and also allows for capturing non-monotonic relationships. Patients were allocated to placebo, active comparator and seven doses of study drug. The adaptive allocation was targeting both the minimum efficacious dose (MED) and the dose achieving the maximum response (Dmax) on the primary endpoint, positive PANSS score at week 4. Weekly data updates were used to change the allocation and check early stopping rules based on predictive probabilities. A stopping rule for futility was based on a prespecified threshold that no treatment dose achieves the clinically significant difference (CSD) over placebo. A stopping rule for efficacy required sufficient knowledge about the MED and Dmax and a prespecified confidence that the Dmax achieves CSD. For details, see Shen et al.12 The adaptive design allowed earlier (5 months) decision making with a 99% confidence in futility decision with $14m savings in direct grant cost. The design, implementation, and outcome of a response adaptive dose-ranging trial of an investigational drug in patients with diabetes, incorporating a PAGE 7 dose expansion approach to flexibly address both efficacy and safety has also been reported recently by Berry et al.13 The early (2 months) futility decision was achieved with a $3.6m saving in direct cost and additional cost savings in avoiding expensive production of phase III drug supplies. Therapeutic Area Adaptive Design Trial Outcome Metrics Rheumatoid Arthritis Adaptive combined Multiple Ascending Dose and Proof of Concept Study Successful trial criteria met for the achievement of clinical POC in Rheumatoid Arthritis Programme accelerated by 9-month; $1.2m saving by combining two trials in one Post-Operative Nausea & Vomiting Proof of concept and adaptive dose-ranging study design Early stopping for futility $0.5m savings and redeployment of resource Post-Herpetic Neuralgia Proof of concept and adaptive dose-ranging study design Early stopping for futility $2m savings and re-deployment of resource Schizophrenia Adaptive dose-ranging Early stopping for futility $14m savings and re-deployment of resource FIGURE 4: Summary of Early Phase Case Studies SUMMARY Early phase adaptive design trials address a number of critical development questions that need to be answered before commitment is made to phase III confirmatory trials. The application of these innovative designs early in the product development process enhances clinical trial efficiency, productivity and increases the probability of success at phase III. The deployment of these approaches across a pipeline of products brings substantial benefits to sponsor companies and enables more effective portfolio management and ultimately increases portfolio value (Figure 5). adaptive by nature, but more recent adaptive designs provide better estimate of drug safety (e.g. the maximum tolerated dose) and better understanding of its PK/PD characteristics. Combining the objectives of conventional Phase IIa and IIb studies in a single trial provides the obvious benefit of reducing the timeline by running the two studies seamlessly under a single protocol with the same clinical team. Furthermore, such approaches achieve trial efficiency by the prospective integration of data from both IIa and IIb in the final analysis. assessment of proof-of-mechanism in the very first study conducted with the investigational compound. The ability to assess proof-of-mechanism in this early developmental setting provides an opportunity to greatly enhance the clinical development strategy for the compound. The adaptation is intended to quickly hone in on the predicted dose-range of interest. This avoids the risks associated with exposing patients in an ineffective low dose range, whilst minimizing exposure to high doses with an unacceptable tolerability and safety profile. FIRST-IN-HUMAN SINGLE ASCENDING DOSE ESCALATION DESIGNS CRM Offers a Better Approach to Accurately Determining the MTD in Early Phase Oncology Studies In contrast to traditional dose escalation designs, where for example, cohorts of subjects are allocated to ascending doses (and placebo) until a maximum tolerated dose (MTD) is empirically determined, the continual reassessment method (CRM) models the dose- and/or exposure-toxicity relationship to focus on the identification of the dose-range of interest near the MTD and for this to be explored further. These adaptive dose escalation designs can be expanded to also efficiently establish proof-of-mechanism or proof-of-target modulation, if validated biomarker endpoints are available. CRM models are becoming routine for early phase oncology studies where accurate definition of the MTD is critical for selecting the optimum dose for efficacy assessment. Conventional 3+3 designs have been shown to significantly underestimate the MTD which increases the risk of poor outcome in efficacy trials.3 SEAMLESS MULTIPLE ASCENDING DOSE AND PROOF-OF-CONCEPT STUDY DESIGNS The objective of seamless multiple ascending dose and proof-of-concept studies is to combine a multiple ascending dose (MAD) study in patients with the proof-of-concept of the investigational compound. First-in Human Single ascending dose escalation designs Up-and-Down and CRM to find MTD Establish Proof-of-Mechanism or Proof-of-Target Modulation MAD and PoC Two-stage adaptive approach in patients 1st stage to identify MTD 2nd stage to select dose and exposure levels (necessary cond.) PoC and ADRS Start with the highest feasible tolerated dose and placebo If a pre-specified futility condition is satisfied > stop Otherwise, open enrollment to lower doses CASE STUDY Seamless Phase I/II Design SAD or MAD combined with Biomaker-based Efficacy To identify the Optimal Safe Dose Adaptive Dose Ranging Design Finding a target dose (MED, EDp) Response Adaptive Allocation Covariate Adjusted Response Adaptive Allocation A good example is seen in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. The study design involved a MAD escalation study, in which patients were randomly assigned only to the lowest treatment group or placebo in a 3:1 ratio (active treatment or placebo) which then converted into a parallel enrolling, proof of concept (POC) dose ranging study (see Figure 2). Consistent with the MAD paradigm, dose escalation (allowing subjects in the next higher dose level to CRM: Continual Reassessment Method; MTD: Maximum Tolerated Dose; MAD: Multiple Ascending Dose; SAD: Single Ascending Dose; MED: Minimum Effective Dose; EDp: Dose achieving 100p% of maximum effect FIGURE 1: Types of Adaptive Designs in the Learn Phase The traditional First in Human study objectives of safety and tolerability can be extended to include an PAGE 4
9 The Use of Adaptive Design in the Learn Phase Offers the Best Opportunity to Assess the Product Characteristics that Determine Success Judicious use of adaptive designs may increase the information value per resource unit invested by avoiding allocation of patients to nonefficacious/unsafe therapies and allowing stopping decisions to be made at the earliest possible time point. Ultimately this will accelerate the development of promising therapies to benefit patients. Adaptive Clinical Trials can result in the more ethical treatment of patients from at least two perspectives. First, a larger number of patients can be randomized to more favorable, effective doses with fewer patients exposed to less effective doses. In addition, there is the potential for including fewer total patients in the early stages of the development programmes with attending lower risk of exposure to adverse events. A greater saving in patients may be obtained at the programme level rather than the individual study level as adaptive methodology applied across a programme will reduce the need to repeat ineffective or inconclusive studies. Adaptive designs represent an advanced methodology to support drug development. A prerequisite for their successful implementation is an understanding of the underlying methodology and their impact on the logistics of the trial, such as data management and monitoring procedures, electronic data capture/interactive web response services, drug supply management, and data-monitoring committee operating procedures. These designs have an impact on drug development strategies, trial protocols, clinical trial material doses and availability, informed consent forms, data analysis, and reporting plans. Adaptive design will also change the dynamics of PAGE 3 enrollment, randomization, and data capturing process, monitoring, and data cleaning systems. To be able to make informed decisions, the sponsor must have access to real time clinical data from all sources and be able to easily review and assess this data. Strategy Clinical Trial Development Programme This in turn requires flexibility through: Data management systems for rapid clinical data access and data cleaning Drug supply systems for drug product planning and management Optimal systems providing randomization, medication kit management and emergency unblinding Planning of Adaptive Clinical Trials is a key feature in the success of such innovative approaches. Determining the optimal characteristics of the study design can be a complex yet critical decision that may require more upfront planning before the protocol can be finalized. However, there are several commercial software packages that provide a powerful tool for planning, simulation and analysis of complex adaptive designs. FACTS is comprehensive software for adaptive designs in the Learn phase and includes early stage dose-escalation designs, adaptive dose-ranging studies, interim decision rules based on both efficacy and safety responses, and population enrichment. ADDPLAN is a validated software package for adaptive design in the Confirm phase and incorporates sample size re-estimation, adaptive group sequential designs, multiple comparison procedures for multi-armed adaptive trials, including treatment selection designs, flexible combination of clinical research phases, and population enrichment designs. Development Pipeline Benefits Value of adopting an adaptive strategy appealing feature of adaptive designs in exploratory development, leading to enhanced learning to set the appropriate stage for confirmatory trials. Trial Efficiency Better decision-making More information per $ invested Increased probability of success at Phase III Pipeline efficiency and productivity FIGURE 5: Adaptive Design Creates Value at Level of the Single Trial, Development Programme and Product Pipeline This aspect is discussed further in an accompanying white paper that explores the strategic utilisation of adaptive design at the development programme and product pipeline level. Importantly, recent data from Merck has indicated that adoption of an early phase adaptive trial strategy at this level saves at least $200m annually (Schindler J, Disruptive Innovations Conference, Boston, 2012). TYPES OF ADAPTIVE DESIGNS IN LEARN STUDIES Examples of adaptive designs in the Learn phase are shown in Figure 1. Phase I studies are already PAGE 8
The Promise and Challenge of Adaptive Design in Oncology Trials
THE POWER OFx Experts. Experience. Execution. The Promise and Challenge of Adaptive Design in Oncology Trials Clinical oncology trials are more complex and time consuming than those in any other therapeutic
More informationDraft agreed by Scientific Advice Working Party 5 September Adopted by CHMP for release for consultation 19 September
23 January 2014 EMA/CHMP/SAWP/757052/2013 Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) Qualification Opinion of MCP-Mod as an efficient statistical methodology for model-based design and analysis
More informationAdaptive Design for Medical Device Development
Adaptive Design for Medical Device Development A guide to accelerate clinical development and enhance portfolio value Executive Summary In May 2015, the FDA released a draft guidance document regarding
More informationSession 2 summary Designs & Methods. Pairwise comparisons approach. Dose finding approaches discussed: Guiding principles for good dose selection
Session 2 summary Designs & Methods Pairwise comparisons approach Dose finding approaches discussed: PK/PD Modeling (Adaptive) MCPMod Model Averaging Bayesian Adaptive Dose Ranging Emax Dose Response Model
More informationExperience with Adaptive Dose-Ranging Studies in Early Clinical Development
Experience with Adaptive Dose-Ranging Studies in Early Clinical Development Judith Quinlan MSc Vice President Adaptive Trials Cytel Inc. judith.quinlan@cytel.com Thanks to members of the PhRMA Adaptive
More informationShort Course: Adaptive Clinical Trials
Short Course: Adaptive Clinical Trials Presented at the 2 Annual Meeting of the Society for Clinical Trials Vancouver, Canada Roger J. Lewis, MD, PhD Department of Emergency Medicine Harbor-UCLA Medical
More informationPOPULATION ENRICHMENT DESIGNS FOR ADAPTIVE CLINICAL TRIALS. An Aptiv Solutions White Paper
FOR ADAPTIVE CLINICAL TRIALS An Aptiv Solutions White Paper EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The increasing pressure on governments caused by the spiraling healthcare costs is leading to a growing demand by payers for
More informationContinual Reassessment Method for First-in-Human Trial: From Design to Trial Implementation
Continual Reassessment Method for First-in-Human Trial: From Design to Trial Implementation Inna Perevozskaya Statistical Research and Consulting Center, Pfizer in collaboration with Lixin Han, Infinity
More informationAn Overview of Bayesian Adaptive Clinical Trial Design
An Overview of Bayesian Adaptive Clinical Trial Design Roger J. Lewis, MD, PhD Department of Emergency Medicine Harbor-UCLA Medical Center David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA Los Angeles Biomedical
More informationIndustry Academic Collaboration: A Key to Successful Involvement of Patients Early in Clinical Development
Industry Academic Collaboration: A Key to Successful Involvement of Patients Early in Clinical Development Aernout van Haarst PhD Director, European Corporate Development Feb 2016 Industry Academic Collaboration
More informationEarly Phase Education WHITEPAPER. Three major items to consider when moving from preclinical to clinical development
Early Phase Education WHITEPAPER Three major items to consider when moving from preclinical to clinical development Three major items to consider when moving from preclinical to clinical development Dr.
More informationBIOPHARMA SOLUTIONS TM Expedite Your Drug Development Program
BIOPHARMA SOLUTIONS TM Expedite Your Drug Program Maximize the Value of Your Asset The journey of drug development can be complex stressful. But it doesn t have to be that way. Join more than 600 biopharmaceutical
More informationDMC membership experience. P.Bauer Basel May 2016
DMC membership experience P.Bauer Basel May 2016 EMA GUIDELINE ON DATA MONITORING COMMITTEES Clinical trials frequently extend over a long period of time. Thus, for ethical reasons it is desirable to ensure
More informationAlternative Trial Designs
Alternative Trial Designs STATS 773: DESIGN AND ANALYSIS OF CLINICAL TRIALS Dr Yannan Jiang Department of Statistics May 16 th 01, Wednesday, 08:30-10:00 Standard Design of RCT Individual subject is randomly
More informationAdaptive Design in the Real World: Implications for Neuroscience Clinical Studies. February 18, 2015
Adaptive Design in the Real World: Implications for Neuroscience Clinical Studies February 18, 2015 Introduction to AD in the Real World Pharmaceutical companies have a never-ending search to improve the
More informationDesigning a Disease-Specific Master Protocol
Designing a Disease-Specific Master Protocol Lisa M. LaVange, PhD Director, Office of Biostatistics OTS/CDER/FDA Pediatric Master Protocols Workshop September 23, 2016 FDA, White Oak Campus Acknowledgments
More informationThe Role of a Clinical Statistician in Drug Development By: Jackie Reisner
The Role of a Clinical Statistician in Drug Development By: Jackie Reisner Types of studies within clinical development Phase I Phase II Phase III Phase IV Phase I First Human Dose (FHD) Young healthy
More informationThe Role of Adaptive Designs in Clinical Development Program*
The Role of Adaptive Designs in Clinical Development Program* Sue-Jane Wang, Ph.D. Associate Director, Adaptive Design and Pharmacogenomics Office of Biostatistics, Office of Translational Sciences Center
More informationDisclaimer This presentation expresses my personal views on this topic and must not be interpreted as the regulatory views or the policy of the FDA
On multiplicity problems related to multiple endpoints of controlled clinical trials Mohammad F. Huque, Ph.D. Div of Biometrics IV, Office of Biostatistics OTS, CDER/FDA JSM, Vancouver, August 2010 Disclaimer
More informationImproving the productivity of drug development: How can adaptive designs help? Richard Peck, Global Head Clinical Pharmacology, Roche Products Ltd
Improving the productivity of drug development: How can adaptive designs help? Richard Peck, Global Head Clinical Pharmacology, Roche Products Ltd The Cost of Drug Development Eli Lilly R&D Productivity
More informationVisions on the role of Statisticians in the Pharmaceutical Industry. Merete Jørgensen President EFSPI VP Biostatistics, Novo Nordisk A/S
Visions on the role of Statisticians in the Pharmaceutical Industry Merete Jørgensen President EFSPI VP Biostatistics, Novo Nordisk A/S Overview of presentation Vision & Mission A Historical view New Statistical
More informationInternational Transfers of Personal Data at sanofi-aventis R & D
International Transfers of Personal Data at sanofi-aventis R & D Pierre-Yves Lastic, PhD Senior Director, Standards Management & Data Privacy Sanofi-aventis R&D CONFERENCE ON INTERNATIONAL TRANSFERS OF
More informationAdaptive Trials. Raphaël Porcher. CRESS, Inserm UMR-S 1153, Université Paris Descartes
Adaptive Trials Raphaël Porcher CRESS, Inserm UMR-S 1153, Université Paris Descartes Modélisation et simulation d essais cliniques Toulouse 9 10 avril 2015 R. Porcher (CRESS U1153) 1 / 69 Outline Outline
More informationWhen to Stop Dose Escalation: MTD, MLD or?
When to Stop Dose Escalation: MTD, MLD or? Henri CAPLAIN First Joint Annual Meeting, AGAH Club Phase 1 STRASBOURG, France 1 So called MTD STOP FIM No MTD? 2 WHY WE NEED TO REACH THE MAXIMUM TOLERATED DOSE
More informationThe rheumatoid arthritis drug development model: a case study in Bayesian clinical trial simulation
The rheumatoid arthritis drug development model: a case study in Bayesian clinical trial simulation Richard Nixon, Modeling and Simulation, Novartis PSI journal club, 2010 March 24 1 Bayesian clinical
More informationAdaptive Design for Clinical Trials
Adaptive Design for Clinical Trials Mark Chang Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Cambridge, MA 02139,USA (e-mail: Mark.Chang@Statisticians.org) Abstract. Adaptive design is a trial design that allows modifications
More informationCLINICAL DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Diseases
CLINICAL DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Immune-Mediated Inflammary Diseases Table of contents 01 The new inflammation paradigm 02 Solutions for your success 03 An interconnected perspective 04 High-quality data
More informationRegulatory aspects of model based dose selection
Regulatory aspects of model based dose selection Norbert Benda Disclaimer: Views expressed in this presentation are the author's personal views and not necessarily the views of BfArM Does the regulator
More informationFDA Drug Approval Process Vicki Seyfert-Margolis, Ph.D.
Speaker Comparing The Effectiveness Of New Drugs: Should The FDA Be Asking 'Does It Work' Or 'Does It Work Better'? Vicki L. Seyfert-Margolis, PhD Senior Advisor, Science Innovation and Policy U.S. Food
More informationBayesian modelling for combination dose-escalation trial that incorporates pharmacokinetic data
Bayesian modelling for combination dose-escalation trial that incorporates pharmacokinetic data Daniel Lorand (Oncology Early Clinical Biostatistics, Novartis) Basel Biometrics Society Seminar - April
More informationWhat is New on the Regulatory Front?
What is New on the Regulatory Front? Veronica Miller, PhD Forum for Collaborative Research UC Berkeley SPH Outline Innovation in regulatory science Regulatory challenges in NASH Opportunities for innovation
More informationCRO partner in Rx/CDx Co-Development
CRO partner in Rx/CDx Co-Development DEDICATED DIALOGUE A sponsored roundtable discussion published in Pharmaceutical Executive Two Covance executives discuss a CRO s role in supporting Companion Diagnostics
More informationCOMMITTEE FOR MEDICINAL PRODUCTS FOR HUMAN USE (CHMP)
European Medicines Agency Pre-authorisation Evaluation of Medicines for Human Use London, 22 February 2006 EMEA/CHMP/BMWP/42832/2005 COMMITTEE FOR MEDICINAL PRODUCTS FOR HUMAN USE (CHMP) GUIDELINE ON SIMILAR
More informationSTARTING STRONGER IN PHASE I THROUGH IIA
PAREXEL CLINICAL RESEARCH SERVICES: EARLY PHASE STARTING STRONGER IN PHASE I THROUGH IIA Adding value from first-in-human through proof-of-concept YOUR JOURNEY. OUR MISSION. Achieve success through early
More informationDrug Development: Why Does it Cost so Much? Lewis J. Smith, MD Professor of Medicine Director, Center for Clinical Research Associate VP for Research
Drug Development: Why Does it Cost so Much? Lewis J. Smith, MD Professor of Medicine Director, Center for Clinical Research Associate VP for Research Drug Development Process by which new chemical entities
More informationComplex Study Design. Dr Ulrike Lorch MD FRCA FFPM
Complex Study Design Dr Ulrike Lorch MD FRCA FFPM Complex Designs Adaptive study design Fusion/Combined/ Umbrella protocols Umbrella Protocol A number of conventional studies are contained in one single
More informationDecoding Phase II Clinical Trial Terminations
Decoding Phase II Clinical Trial Terminations Why Phase II trials are terminated and what can be done to improve Phase II success rates - the most critical inflection point for clinical development Subha
More informationSummary of Provisions in 21 st Century Cures Act (H.R. 6) as passed by full House of Representatives, July 10, 2015
Pediatric-Specific Provisions Summary of Provisions in 21 st Century Cures Act (H.R. 6) as passed by full House of Representatives, July 10, 2015 Requires the NIH to complete a strategic plan, and in the
More informationCelerion s Symposia Series: Bridging the Gap from Phase I to Proof-of-Concept. San Francisco, CA Tue 8 th, Apr 2014
Celerion s Symposia Series: Bridging the Gap from Phase I to Proof-of-Concept San Francisco, CA Tue 8 th, Apr 2014 Mind the Gap: Elements of a Bridging Strategy J. Fred Pritchard, Ph.D. Vice President,
More informationAnalysis of Clinical Trials with Multiple Objectives
Analysis of Clinical Trials with Multiple Objectives Alex Dmitrienko (Mediana Inc) Regulatory Industry Statistics Workshop September 2017 Outline Regulatory guidelines FDA and EMA draft guidance documents
More informationMRC Biostatistics Unit
MRC Biostatistics Unit Adrian Mander MRC Biostatistics Unit Hub for Trials Methodology Research Cambridge June 2014 Adrian Mander June 2014 1/12 MRC Biostatistics Unit The 4 themes DART Design and Analysis
More informationEstablish the Maximum Tolerated Dose in Phase-I Trials using 3+3 Method
Establish the Maximum Tolerated Dose in Phase-I Trials using 3+3 Method Anup Pillai Cytel, Pune, India Vienna 11 th - 14 th October 2015 1 Agenda Ø Introduction to Phase-1 trials Ø Dose Escalation Studies
More informationMaximizing opportunities towards achieving clinical success D R U G D I S C O V E R Y. Report Price Publication date
F o r a c l e a r e r m a r k e t p e r s p e c t i v e Early Stage Drug Safety Strategies & Risk Management Maximizing opportunities towards achieving clinical success D R U G D I S C O V E R Y Report
More informationComplex Generics: Charting a new path
White paper Complex Generics: Charting a new path Complex generics offer a lucrative market for drug manufacturers, but only if they can adapt to a more complicated and challenging development process.
More informationA full-service CRO with integrated early-stage capabilities
CHARLES RIVER TO ACQUIRE ARGENTA and BIOFOCUS A full-service CRO with integrated early-stage capabilities James C. Foster Chairman, President & CEO Thomas F. Ackerman Executive Vice President & CFO March
More informationNovel multiple testing procedures for structured study objectives and families of hypotheses a case study
Novel multiple testing procedures for structured study objectives and families of hypotheses a case study Guenther Mueller-Velten Novartis Pharma AG EMA Workshop on Multiplicity Issues in Clinical Trials
More informationAdaptive Clinical Trials
MARCH 22 23, 2018 WYNDHAM PHILADELPHIA HISTORIC DISTRICT PHILADELPHIA, PA Adaptive Clinical Trials SYMPOSIUM Analyze Statistics, Data Management, and Operations to Improve Clinical Performance FEATURED
More informationSamatasvir (IDX719), a Potent Pan-Genotypic NS5A Inhibitor, for the Treatment of Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Infection
Samatasvir (IDX719), a Potent Pan-Genotypic NS5A Inhibitor, for the Treatment of Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Infection Douglas Mayers, MD December 11, 2013 1 Idenix: Advancing All-Oral, Pan-Genotypic Combination
More informationClinical Trial Simulations
Clinical Trial Simulations Clinical Pharmacology meeting 07.10. 2014 Flora T Musuamba Outline Introduction Estimation vs Simulations Simulations as a diagnostic tool Simulation as a tool for quantitative
More informationRegulatory hurdles and opportunities
Regulatory hurdles and opportunities Professor Roger Finch Nottingham University Hospitals & University of Nottingham, UK Drug licensing and regulation Mandatory for market authorisation Supports the public
More informationRapidFACT: Accelerated Formulation Development for Poorly Soluble Drugs and Modified Release Products
RapidFACT: Accelerated Formulation Development for Poorly Soluble Drugs and Modified Release Products Kevin Kane, Scientific Director, BCP 7 th Annual Global Drug Delivery & Formulation Summit 28 th August
More informationEnd-to-End Management of Clinical Trials Data
End-to-End Management of Clinical Trials Data A Revolutionary Step Toward Supporting Clinical Trials Analysis Over the Next Decades of Clinical Research WHITE PAPER SAS White Paper Table of Contents Introduction....
More informationEnhancement of the Adaptive Signature Design (ASD) for Learning and Confirming in a Single Pivotal Trial
Enhancement of the Adaptive Signature Design (ASD) for Learning and Confirming in a Single Pivotal Trial Gu Mi, Ph.D. Global Statistical Sciences Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN 46285 mi_gu@lilly.com
More informationNational Foundation for Women Legislators Annual Meeting September 12, 2015 Tara Ryan Vice President, State Government Advocacy
From Hope to Cures: The Value of Biopharmaceutical Innovation National Foundation for Women Legislators Annual Meeting September 12, 2015 Tara Ryan Vice President, State Government Advocacy HIV/AIDS: Then
More informationThe future of drug development. ISPOR Issues Panel May 19 th 2015
The future of drug development ISPOR Issues Panel May 19 th 2015 Professor Adrian Towse Director of the Office of Health Economics Agenda Can we reduce drug development costs? Early access / adaptive pathways
More informationDRUG DEVELOPMENT TARGET PRODUCT PROFILE
DRUG DEVELOPMENT TARGET PRODUCT PROFILE Template This template provides suggested considerations that may assist biopharmaceutical companies in their decisions as to whether to proceed with a drug development
More informationESTIMATE THE IMPACT OF TIME SAVINGS ON YOUR DRUG DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM, ASSET VALUE AND FINANCIAL COMPANY PERFORMANCE
ESTIMATE THE IMPACT OF TIME SAVINGS ON YOUR DRUG DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM, ASSET VALUE AND FINANCIAL COMPANY PERFORMANCE An Economic Comparison of Programmatic and Transactional Development Models PETER SAUSEN,
More informationUnderstanding clinical research trials
Understanding clinical research trials Dr. Isabelle Fleury Medical Hemato-oncologist Hôpital Maisonneuve-Rosemont CIUSSS de l Est-de-l Île-de-Montréal Goals of this presentation Better understand clinical
More informationBioPharm. Smart Outsourcing: Strategic Alignment, Risk Management, and New Relationships
BioPharm Volume 25 Number 3 INTERNATIONAL March 2012 The Science & Business of Biopharmaceuticals Smart Outsourcing: Strategic Alignment, Risk Management, and New Relationships Outsourcing decisions should
More informationRandomized clinical trials serve as the standard for clinical
The new england journal of medicine Review Article The Changing Face of Clinical Trials Jeffrey M. Drazen, M.D., David P. Harrington, Ph.D., John J.V. McMurray, M.D., James H. Ware, Ph.D., and Janet Woodcock,
More informationThree Methods for Phase I/II Clinical Trials, with Application to Allogeneic
Three Methods for Phase I/II Clinical Trials, with Application to Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantation Peter F. Thall, PhD Biostatistics Department M.D. Anderson Cancer Center Workshop on Clinical Trial
More informationMarch 18 th, Dockets Management Branch (HFA-305) Food and Drug Administration 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm Rockville, MD 20852
March 18 th, 2012 Dockets Management Branch (HFA-305) Food and Drug Administration 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061 Rockville, MD 20852 Re: Docket No. FDA 2012 D 1145: Dear Sir/Madam: The Biotechnology Industry
More informationThe Aptuit Center for Drug Discovery & Development Verona, Italy
The Aptuit Center for Drug Discovery & Development Verona, Italy 2 The Aptuit Center for Drug Discovery & Development Verona, Italy Aptuit in Verona: uncommon expertise, exceptional results A knowledgeable
More informationVenture Philanthropy Models: The Leukemia & Lymphoma Society's Therapy Acceleration Program. A FasterCures Webinar June 19, 2013
Venture Philanthropy Models: The Leukemia & Lymphoma Society's Therapy Acceleration Program A FasterCures Webinar June 19, 2013 What is FasterCures? Founded in 2003, our mission is to save lives by saving
More informationGuidance on Data Monitoring Committee: Regulatory Perspective in Japan
Austria-Japan Joint Statistics Workshop Data monitoring committees in clinical trials Guidance on Data Monitoring Committee: Regulatory Perspective in Japan Yuki Ando Senior Scientist for Biostatics Pharmaceuticals
More informationleading the way in research & development
leading the way in research & development people. passion. possibilities. ABBVIE 2 immunology AbbVie Immunology has a demonstrated record of success in identifying and developing both small molecule and
More informationNovartis Business Services HR University Relations. Clinical Sciences and Innovation. Postgraduate Program
Novartis Business Services HR University Relations Clinical Sciences and Innovation Postgraduate Program 2 CLINICAL SCIENCES AND INNOVATION CLINICAL SCIENCES AND INNOVATION 3 The CS&I Postgraduate Program
More informationSTATEMENT SANDRA KWEDER, M.D DEPUTY DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF NEW DRUGS CENTER FOR DRUG EVALUATION AND RESEARCH U.S. FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION BEFORE THE
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES Public Health Service Food and Drug Administration Rockville MD 20857 STATEMENT OF SANDRA KWEDER, M.D DEPUTY DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF NEW DRUGS CENTER FOR DRUG EVALUATION
More informationSecond Quarter 2016 Financial Results. August 4, 2016
Second Quarter 2016 Financial Results August 4, 2016 Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements This presentation and various remarks we make during this presentation contain forward-looking
More informationCORPORATE NEWS EARNINGS PAION AG PUBLISHES GROUP QUARTERLY STATEMENT FOR THE FIRST NINE MONTHS OF 2016
CORPORATE NEWS EARNINGS PAION AG PUBLISHES GROUP QUARTERLY STATEMENT FOR THE FIRST NINE MONTHS OF 2016 Positive remimazolam data in pivotal U.S. Phase III study for procedural sedation during colonoscopy
More information1.4 Applicable Regulatory Requirement(s) Any law(s) and regulation(s) addressing the conduct of clinical trials of investigational products.
1.1 Adverse Drug Reaction (ADR) In the pre-approval clinical experience with a new medicinal product or its new usages, particularly as the therapeutic dose(s) may not be established: all noxious and unintended
More informationThe interface between Good Clinical Practice and Good Manufacturing Practice
1 The interface between Good Clinical Practice and Good Manufacturing Practice your partner in compliance 1 The interface between GCP and GMP Generally, studies are designed and planned by physicians who
More informationINTRODUCTION TO MODERN RANDOMIZATION AND TRIAL SUPPLY MANAGEMENT SERVICES
WHITE PAPER INTRODUCTION TO MODERN RANDOMIZATION AND TRIAL SUPPLY MANAGEMENT SERVICES Randomization is fundamental to clinical trials it enables treatment group balance, eliminates selection bias and limits
More informationThe Economics of New Drug Development: Costs, Risks, and Returns
The Economics of New Drug Development: Costs, Risks, and Returns Joseph A. DiMasi, Ph.D. Tufts Center for the Study of Drug Development Tufts University The New England Drug Metabolism Group Spring Meeting
More informationAddressing attrition in neurosciences. Dr Ismail Kola Head UCB NewMedicines
Addressing attrition in neurosciences Dr Ismail Kola Head UCB NewMedicines Disclaimer and safe harbour Forward-looking statements: This presentation contains forward-looking statements based on current
More informationClinical Trial Optimization via Simulations. Thursday November 9, 2017
Clinical Trial Optimization via Simulations Thursday November 9, 2017 Clinical Trial Optimization via Simulations Today s Forum is hosted by the MassBio Biostatistics/Statistical Programming/Data Management/Clinical
More informationSecond Quarter 2017 Financial Results. August 8, 2017
Second Quarter 2017 Financial Results August 8, 2017 Agios Conference Call Participants Prepared Remarks Introduction RENEE LECK, Sr. Manager, Investor Relations Business Highlights & 2017 Key Milestones
More informationDesigning Safe and Efficient Phase I Studies to Expedite Clinical Development
Designing Safe and Efficient Phase I Studies to Expedite Clinical Development Mario Tanguay, B.Pharm, Ph.D. Vice President, Scientific & Regulatory Affairs, Anapharm Guest Professor, Faculty of Pharmacy,
More informationDaniel Sabanés Bové (presented by Giuseppe Palermo)
Model-based D/E designs: Current status and next steps Basel Biometrics Society Seminar, 26 June 2017 Daniel Sabanés Bové (presented by Giuseppe Palermo) Background of early phase clinical trials Main
More information4th ANTWERP BIOPHARM DAY SAFETY & EFFICACY CLINICAL TRIALS SOLUTIONS DATE: OCTOBER 29, 2015
4th ANTWERP BIOPHARM DAY SAFETY & EFFICACY CLINICAL TRIALS SOLUTIONS DATE: OCTOBER 29, 2015 VENUE: LINDNER HOTEL LANGE KIEVITSTRAAT 125 BE-2018 ANTWERP, BELGIUM 2 Join the 4 th one-day seminar to discuss
More informationUtilizing Innovative Statistical Methods. Discussion Guide
Utilizing Innovative Statistical Methods and Trial Designs in Rare Disease Settings Discussion Guide Background Rare diseases are a complex and diverse set of conditions which, when taken together, affect
More informationMitochondrial Manipulation Technologies: Preclinical Considerations
Mitochondrial Manipulation Technologies: Preclinical Considerations Wei Liang, Ph.D. FDA / CBER / OCTGT Wei.liang@fda.hhs.gov Ethical and Social Policy Considerations of Novel Techniques for Prevention
More informationMcKinsey Center for Government What's Driving the Recent Surge in New Drug Approvals?
McKinsey Center for Government What's Driving the Recent Surge in New Drug Approvals? Alexia Cesar, Philip Ma, Navjot Singh, Jeff Smith What's Driving the Recent Surge in New Drug Approvals? In 2012, the
More informationReflection paper on co-development of pharmacogenomic biomarkers and Assays in the context of drug development
1 2 3 24 June 2010 EMA/CHMP/641298/2008 Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) 4 5 6 7 Reflection paper on co-development of pharmacogenomic biomarkers and Assays in the context of drug
More informationDeveloping a European First-in-Human Study: Three Key Decisions
Developing a European First-in-Human Study: Three Key Decisions By Nicole Feist, BA Clinical A key step in the translational medicine benchtop to bedside process model is the move from research and preclinical
More informationSmart Outsourcing: Strategic Alignment, Risk Management, and New Relationships
Smart Outsourcing: Strategic Alignment, Risk Management, and New Relationships Outsourcing decisions should be made to foster potential long-term strategic partnerships. Mar 02, 2012 By Ian Uydess, William
More informationTrial oversight SOP for HEY-sponsored CTIMPs
R&D Department Trial oversight SOP for HEY-sponsored CTIMPs Hull And East Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust 2010 All Rights Reserved No part of this document may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system
More informationFebruary 28, Churchill Place Canary Wharf London E14 5EU United Kingdom
February 28, 2017 Submission of comments on 'Guideline on strategies to identify and mitigate risks for first-in-human and early clinical trials with investigational medicinal products' (EMEA/CHMP/SWP/28367/07
More informationDelivering on the promise: the clinical application of new diagnoses and treatments for RD K A T E B U S H B Y N E W C A S T L E U N I V E R S I T Y
Delivering on the promise: the clinical application of new diagnoses and treatments for RD K A T E B U S H B Y N E W C A S T L E U N I V E R S I T Y PERSPECTIVE/ DISCLAIMERS Doctor with >24 years experience
More informationSTATE OF THE ASIA-PACIFIC PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY 2013: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
STATE OF THE ASIA-PACIFIC PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY 2013: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY State of the Asia-Pacific Pharmaceutical Industry The pharmaceutical industry in the Asia-Pacific region has recently been besieged
More informationBayesian Statistics at the FDA: The Trailblazing Experience with Medical Devices
Bayesian Statistics at the FDA: The Trailblazing Experience with Medical Devices Greg Campbell, Ph.D. Director, Division of Biostatistics Center for Devices and Radiological Health Food and Drug Administration
More informationLife Sciences Practice
Life Sciences Practice The healthcare landscape has recently experienced considerable changes, including highly visible public demands for safer and improved healthcare systems. At the core of this is
More informationSMEs in IMI2 Calls for Proposals
SMEs in IMI2 Calls for Proposals Why should an SME participate in an IMI project IMI projects are focused on translating excellent research into real world outcomes an opportunity for SMEs Unique collaborative
More informationExpanded Access. to Investigational Drugs & Biologics. for Treatment Use
SJMHS Research Compliance Office Guidance Document Expanded Access to Investigational Drugs & Biologics for Treatment Use May 2015 1 Expanded Access to Investigational Drugs & Biologics for Treatment Use
More informationWorkshop on Access to and Uptake of Biosimilar Medicinal Products
EUROPEAN COMMISSION Directorate-General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs Consumer, Environmental and Health Technologies Biotechnology and Food Supply Chain Workshop on Access to
More informationA drug development crossroad lies ahead
G L O B A L C B O C O S T E F F E C T I V E B I O A N A L Y T I C A L H I G H Q U A L I T Y E A R L Y S T A G E C L I N I C A L T R A N S L A T I O N A L M E D I C I N E H I G H L Y C O M P E T E N T A
More informationReimbursement Strategy for Companion Diagnostics:
Reimbursement Strategy for Companion Diagnostics: Emerging Models and Requirements Edward E. Berger, Ph.D. Larchmont Strategic Advisors Definition Companion diagnostic A diagnostic test used to predict
More informationGlobal Development Challenges: Classical and Advanced Therapy Medicinal products
Global Development Challenges: Classical and Advanced Therapy Medicinal products Beatriz Silva Lima imed, Lisbon University and Infarmed,, Portugal CHMP, CAT, SAWP Member and SWP Chair NONCLINICAL STUDIES
More information8. Clinical Trial Assessment Phase II
8. Clinical Trial Assessment Phase II Junko Sato, PhD Office of New Drug I, PMDA Disclaimer: The information within this presentation is based on the presenter s expertise and experience, and represents
More information