Regulatory Perspective on the Value of Bayesian Methods

Similar documents
The Value of Bayesian Approaches in the Regulatory Setting: Lessons from the Past and Perspectives for the Future

Medical Device Regulatory Science: A View from 20 Years at FDA s Device Center

Designing a Disease-Specific Master Protocol

FDA initiatives to facilitate evaluation of novel percutaneous valve technologies within the US

An Introduction to Flexible Adaptive Designs

Docket #: FDA-2018-D-3268

Adaptive Design for Medical Device Development

Experience with Adaptive Dose-Ranging Studies in Early Clinical Development

Use of Real-World Evidence to Support Regulatory Decision-Making for Medical Devices

Leveraging adult data in pediatric product development: The role of Bayesian statistics

Statistical Challenges: Designs for clinical trials with limited patient populations

Utilizing Innovative Statistical Methods. Discussion Guide

Short Course: Adaptive Clinical Trials

Adaptive Trials and Trial Simulation. Kert Viele CTMC 2018

An Overview of Bayesian Adaptive Clinical Trial Design

THE FDA, THE DRUG APPROVAL PROCESS, AND THE PATIENT VOICE

Clinical Study Design for Medical Devices

Moving Forward. Adaptive Eligibility Criteria, Alternate Trial Designs, and Subgroup Analysis. Elizabeth Garrett-Mayer, PhD

Facilitating Antibacterial Drug Development: Bayesian vs Frequentist Methods

Structure and Mandate of FDA

CDRH Device Approval

Bayesian Statistics at the FDA: The Trailblazing Experience with Medical Devices

Introduction to Adaptive Design Roger J. Lewis, MD, PhD

FDA from a Former FDAer: Secrets and insights into regulatory review and drug development

A biomarker-based adaptive two-stage randomizedphase II study design

2/11/2014. Key Sources of Uncertainty in the Assessment of Benefits and Risks of Pharmaceuticals and Associated Challenges. Disclaimer.

Clinical Trial Methods Course 2017 Trials in Rare Diseases. Erika Augustine, MD, MS University of Rochester Medical Center August 10, 2017

Benefit-Risk Considerations for Medical Devices: A Panel Discussion. Tuesday, March 28, :00 4:15 pm ET

PHARMA CONGRESS. Pharmacovigilance and Drug Safety: Assessing Future Regulatory and Compliance Developments. October 28, 2008

Regulatory Perspectives on Gene Therapies for Rare Diseases Rare Diseases Forum Washington, D.C. October 17, 2018

Bayesian Designs for Clinical Trials in Early Drug Development

Rare Diseases and CDER: Challenges and Opportunities

Guidance for Industry and FDA Staff Procedures for Handling Post-Approval Studies Imposed by PMA Order

U.S. FDA CENTER FOR DEVICES AND RADIOLOGICAL HEALTH UPDATE

Evidentiary Considerations for Integration of Biomarkers in Drug Development : Statistical Considerations

Introduction to the Design and Evaluation of Group Sequential

BIOSTATISTICAL METHODS

FDA Perspective on Clinical Trial Design for Rare Diseases

Bayesian Submissions to FDA and the Evidentiary Standard for Effectiveness: the CDRH Experience

PDUFA VI Public Meeting Remarks of Cynthia A. Bens Alliance for Aging Research. August 15, 2016

Speed your time to market with FDA s expedited programs

BIOSTATISTICAL METHODS FOR TRANSLATIONAL & CLINICAL RESEARCH

P. Ranganath Nayak. James A. Bolognese. Chief Executive Officer, Cytel Inc. Senior Director, Biostatistics, Cytel, Inc. Shaping the Future

Regulatory Issues and Strategies: U.S. FDA

Adaptive Clinical Trials: A Necessary Step toward Personalized Medicine. Donald A. Berry

A Patient/Advocate Perspective

Issues in Clinical Trial Designs for Devices

Experience with Bayesian Clinical Trial Designs for Cardiac Medical Devices

The BEST Platform. A Modular Early-Phase Platform for Seamless Dose Finding and Cohort Expansion Laiya Consulting, Inc. 2018

OPC. The Use of Objective Performance Criteria in Medical Device Trials: An Industry perspective. David Breiter Boston Scientific CRM

Murray Sheldon, MD Associate Director for Technology and Innovation Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) Office of the Center Director

Tina Morrison, Ph.D. Chair, Committee on Modeling and Simulation Office of the Chief Scientist U.S. Food and Drug Administration

Bayesian Designs for Early Phase Clinical Trials

Advancing Regulatory Science for Medical Countermeasures Development: An Institute of Medicine Workshop

US FDA Expedited Programs and Expanded Access

Fast track Approval process- Ethical considerations

May 9, Meeting Summary. Facilitating Antibacterial Drug Development

Reflection paper on the use of extrapolation in the development of medicines for paediatrics

Regulatory update from Europe:

FDA S DRAFT GUIDANCE ON MULTIPLE ENDPOINTS IN CLINICAL TRIALS: OVERVIEW, RECEPTION AND NEXT STEPS. John Scott, Ph.D. FDA/CBER 5 October 2017

Incorporating Virtual Patients into Clinical Studies

The Use of Real-World Evidence to Support Regulatory Decision-Making for Medical Devices

February 15, Re: Docket No. FDA-2017-D-6159: Expedited Programs for Regenerative Medicine Therapies for Serious Conditions

FDA Guidance, Clinical Pharmacology, and Regulatory Science

Clinical trial design issues and options for study of rare diseases

While individually rare, orphan diseases are actually collectively common, with an OF ORPHAN DRUG DEVELOPMENT MEETING THE UNIQUE CHALLENGES

Strengthening the prospective discussions on post-licensing evidence generation

CDER and CBER Experience

The Construction of a Clinical Trial. Lee Ann Lawson MS ARNP CCRC

Impact of Patient Engagement on Project Valuation

Re: Docket No. FDA 2015-D-1580:

Field trial with veterinary vaccine

A Life-cycle Approach to Dose Finding Studies

Use of Real World Data in Development Programmes

Promotion & Advertising of Combination Products: Key Postmarket Considerations

Rare Diseases Drug Development and Patient Perspective Initiatives at FDA

Patient-focused Benefit-Risk Assessment

General Comments. May 30, Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305) Food and Drug Administration 5630 Fishers Lane, Room 1061 Rockville, MD 20852

Understanding Simulations and Their Value in Clinical Trial Planning. William Meurer, MD, MS Scott Berry, PhD

December 4, Dockets Management Branch (HFA-305) Food and Drug Administration 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm Rockville, MD 20852

Medical Product Communications That Are Consistent With the FDA-Required Labeling Questions and Answers Guidance for Industry

Bayesian Adaptive Clinical Trials in the 21st Century. Ben Saville, Ph.D. Berry Consultants

Pediatric drug development - do we need a PIP so early in development? American versus European approach

Scott Gottlieb, MD Commissioner of Food and Drugs Food and Drug Administration New Hampshire Avenue Silver Spring, MD 20993

Pharmacovigilance and Drug Safety Compliance Update GAP Analysis: How We Get to Where We Want to Be

Combination Products Coalition ( CPC ); Points to Consider in Drafting FDA s Co-development Guidance and Other Companion Diagnostic Guidances

MASTER PROTOCOLS IN COLLABORATIVE RESEARCH

October 25, Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305) Food and Drug Administration 5630 Fishers Lane, Room 1061 Rockville, MD 20852

Bipartisan Policy Center, Top Medical Innovation Priorities

Session 2 summary Designs & Methods. Pairwise comparisons approach. Dose finding approaches discussed: Guiding principles for good dose selection

CAMD ANNUAL REGULATORY SCIENCE WORKSHOP OCTOBER 19, 2016 A CASE FOR INNOVATION, PROGRESS, AND OPTIMISM

Methods for Expediting Innovative Novel Drugs to Market

New Drug Application (NDA) Webinar December 6, 2016

Disclaimer This presentation expresses my personal views on this topic and must not be interpreted as the regulatory views or the policy of the FDA

FDA Decisions for Investigational Device Exemption (IDE) Clinical Investigations

The Promise of Novel Clinical Trial Designs. Michael Parides, Ph.D. Mount Sinai School of Medicine

Comments from the FDA Working Group on SUBGROUP ANALYSES. Estelle Russek-Cohen, Ph.D. U.S. Food and Drug Administration Center for Biologics

Medical Device Development Tools. Draft Guidance for Industry, Tool Developers, and Food and Drug Administration Staff

Summary of Day 1. Christopher Granger

Accelerated Approvals

Transcription:

American Course on Drug Development and Regulatory Sciences Substantial Evidence in 21st Century Regulatory Science Borrowing Strength from Accumulating Data April 21, 2016 Regulatory Perspective on the Value of Bayesian Methods 2013 The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved

Presentation Developed By Telba Irony, PhD Deputy Director, Office of Biostatistics and Epidemiology Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, FDA Previously Chief of the General and Surgical Devices Branch at the Division of Biostatistics Center for Devices and Radiological Health, FDA

Disclosures, Affiliations, and Acknowledgements Contributors to the ideas presented today include: John Scott, PhD (CBER) Don Berry, PhD and Scott Berry, PhD Disclosures This talk reflects my views and represent my own best judgement. These comments do not bind or obligate FDA

Outline 1. The use of prior information to power clinical trials 2. Bayesian adaptive designs 3. Simulations of clinical trials 4. Predictive distributions 5. Decision analysis: Benefit-Risk

1. The use of prior information When prior information is available, it could be used to increase the power of clinical trials It can reduce the size and length of trial: same decision reached faster Sources: clinical trials conducted overseas sponsor s own previous studies legally available data on same or similar products data registries prior information on control groups adult prior information extrapolated for pediatric population

Regulatory Perspective Agreement to be reached in advance between sponsor and FDA (exchangeability; suitability of the prior) CBER approval: Xyntha prior on safety data from a previous version of the product (described in the label ) Other cases under IND Priors may be too informative: Remedies discount the prior distribution in some way increase the stringency of the success criterion increase the sample size of the pivotal trial Bayesian hierarchical models Study 1 Mean 1 n1 Study 2 Mean 2 n2 Study 3 Mean 3 n3 New Study New Mean n

Regulatory Perspective Subjectivity How to choose the prior? Whose prior? How to discount the prior? Hierarchical models: how to choose the hyper parameters? Selection bias: unfavorable prior information may have been omitted or selected (control group) Will future regulators or advisory panel members agree with current regulators? Legal: prior information may not be legally available Need to control type I error rates; significance level fixed at traditional values: 5% or 2.5% If tradition cannot be relaxed, all prior information is discounted no gains in using the prior information Agree to increase the traditional value to a higher level

Promising areas for use of prior information Pediatric trials: extrapolation from adult population Pediatric draft guidance - 2015 http://www.fda.gov/downloads/medicaldevices/deviceregulationandguidance/guidancedocuments/uc M444591.pdf Safety Rare diseases or Small populations Unmet medical need for life threatening or irreversible debilitating diseases Expedited Access Program (EAP) (CDRH and CBER) EAP guidance - 2015 http://www.fda.gov/downloads/medicaldevices/deviceregulationandguidance/guidancedocuments/uc M393978.pdf If control of type I error is required, the significance level needs to be set at a higher level (see two-phase studies in the EAP guidance) so prior information can be used

2. Bayesian Adaptive Designs Inherent to the Bayesian approach Can reduce the size (length) of a trial faster decision Can increase the size (length) of a trial. If it happens, it is needed Interim analyses for decisions on stopping or continuing recruiting based on predictive distributions sample size decided and optimized during the trial Goldilocks trials Modeling: results at early follow-up times predict results at the final follow-up. Model refined at interim looks when all follow-up results from patients recruited early are available. Adaptive randomization Probability of assignment to a treatment depends on data obtained thus far Ethically appealing: allocates more patients to the best treatments

Example: Bayesian adaptive design Treatment vs. Control: Success or Failure at 24 months Follow-up times: 3, 6, 12 and 24 months Interim looks For sample size adaptation For effectiveness For futility Constant or varying accrual rate Model: earlier visits are used to predict 24-month results of patients that have not yet reached the 24-month follow-up Exchangeability among patients recruited early and later in the trial

Interim Looks for Sample Size Adaptation Accrue 300 pts Calculate PP* for adaptation Accrue 50 more pts if N<800 Yes Stop Accrual and Label N Next Slide! Stop recruiting? No 100 complete pts Calculate PP for futility? Yes Stop and claim Futility No * PP = Posterior Probability

Interim Looks for Effectiveness N is now fixed Four interim looks at 0, 6, 12 and 18 months Wait 6 months Calculate PP All pts complete? No Yes No 100 complete pts Test success Yes Yes Test success No Stop for Success Claim Futility

Regulatory Perspective Increase the probability of trial success (insurance) Achieve optimal sample size Advantageous when there is no prior information Crucial when using prior information (hierarchical model): amount of strength to be borrowed is uncertain avoid failure for lack of power Adaptive randomization ethically attractive: better overall patient outcomes Increases statistical power

Regulatory Perspective Very advantageous when Bayesian modeling is used to predict an endpoint from earlier follow up visits savings in sample size Stopping early occurs when surprises arise: Treatment is better (success) or worse (futility) than predicted Sample variability is smaller than predicted Bayesian model makes good predictions (correlation among follow up times is high) Simulations are used to assess operating characteristics of the trial design - control type I error rates and power (no mathematical formulas for Bayesian adaptive designs)

3. Simulations Simulate the trial thousands of times making assumptions about the true value of the endpoints and look at the average performance: How often does it get the right answer? Calculate error rates for Bayesian trial designs Increase trial predictability and help sponsors prepare and budget for different scenarios and surprises Readily understood by clinicians who can observe what will happen under various scenarios Provide ability to look into the future to avoid anticipated regret : if the trial were to fail, what would we do differently in retrospect? When you do the real trial, it is not the first time you are doing it, it is 1,000,001 th!

Regulatory Perspective Simulations are conducted at the design stage Devise a comprehensive number of scenarios to generate data Make assumptions to generate data Assess and control error rates (type I and type II error rates) under all possible scenarios and assumptions It may be more difficult for the FDA to review the simulations It may take more effort to reach agreement with the FDA at the design stage Sponsor s documentation including the simulation code are useful to facilitate the review

Simulations are essential to strategize trial design Choose design type: Adaptive or not? Bayesian or frequentist? Will prediction be used? Sophisticated adaptation or just sample size re-estimation? Calculate probabilities of success under different scenarios Calculate expected trial duration and expected trial cost Optimize clinical trial design features

Design features to be optimized Stopping rules for success and futility Number and timing of interim analyses Prior probabilities; hierarchical model parameters; discount factors Predictive model Minimum sample size (should also consider safety) Maximum sample size Randomization ratio Accrual rate (not too fast and not too slow) Dose/treatment selection Number of centers Use of covariates (subgroup analysis)

4. Predictive probabilities Probability of future events given observed data Probability of results for a future patient in the trial Probability of results for missing patients Help to decide when to stop a trial Help to decide whether to stop or to continue recruiting Help physicians and patients make decisions about the use of a treatment (labeling) Predict a clinical outcome from a valid surrogate (modeling) Adjust trial results for missing data

Prediction in Labeling For a new patient receiving Treatment, the chance (predictive probability) of overall success would be 57%. Given the variability of the results in the study, there is 95% probability that this chance ranges from 49% to 65%. For a new patient receiving Control, the chance (predictive probability) of overall success would be 52%. Given variability of the results in the study, there is 95% probability that this chance ranges from 48% to 56%.

5. Decision Analysis: Benefit-Risk Determinations Postmarket Surveillance

Benefit - Risk guidance for medical devices http://www.fda.gov/downloads/medicaldevices/deviceregulationandg uidance/guidancedocuments/ucm296379.pdf CDER-CBER Benefit Risk framework for drugs and biologics Focus on qualitative approaches Slightly different factors

Factors for Benefit Risk Determination Benefits: type, magnitude, probability, duration Risks: severities, types, probabilities, duration, risk of false positives and false negatives for diagnostic devices Uncertainty Additional Factors: Context Severity and chronicity of the disease Patient tolerance for risk and perspective on benefit Availability of alternative treatments Risk mitigation Post-market information Novel technology for unmet medical need

Patient tolerance for risk and perspective on benefit Risk tolerance will vary among patients, and this will affect individual patient decisions as to whether the risks are acceptable in exchange for a probable benefit. FDA would consider evidence relating to patients perspective of what constitutes a meaningful benefit. The CDRH - CBER Benefit-Risk guidance document for medical devices did not say how to submit Patient Preference Information to the Center

Patient Preference Information http://www.fda.gov/downloads/medicaldevices/deviceregulationandguidance/guidance Documents/UCM446680.pdf

Thank you