Literature DB >> 15733220

Predicting the outcome of phase III trials using phase II data: a case study of clinical trial simulation in late stage drug development.

Filip De Ridder1.   

Abstract

Maximizing the likelihood of success in Phase III is the ultimate goal of the use of modelling and simulation in the drug development process. The success in Phase III depends primarily on two questions: 1) Is the drug regimen actually efficacious and safe in the targeted patient population?, and 2) Will the planned Phase III clinical trial(s) be successful in demonstrating this? Traditionally, the first question is addressed in a qualitative, overall interpretation of available study results. Integrating this information into a formal statistical model of the action of the drug, allows running simulations to investigate the impact of uncertainties and imprecision in this knowledge. The second question is related to having an adequately designed clinical trial. Clinical trial simulation, using a drug action model, supplemented with appropriate models for disease progression and trial execution, allows assessing the impact of typical design features such as doses, sample size, in-/exclusion criteria, drop-out and trial duration on the trial outcome and thus optimising trial design. In this contribution, the use of modelling and simulation in the Phase II to Phase III transition is illustrated using real data of a drug for symptom relief in a chronic condition. A dose-response model of the clinical response was developed using data from Phase II. Simulations were performed to 1) generate the range of possible outcomes of ongoing Phase III trials and compare these to the blinded data being generated from these trials; 2) assess the robustness of the ongoing Phase III trials with respect to uncertainty of the true dose-response, patient variability in baseline severity and drug-response, and 3) assess the likelihood of achieving a clinically relevant response with a dose lower than those included in the trials.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15733220     DOI: 10.1111/j.1742-7843.2005.pto960314.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Basic Clin Pharmacol Toxicol        ISSN: 1742-7835            Impact factor:   4.080


  7 in total

Review 1.  Antiretroviral pharmacology in mucosal tissues.

Authors:  Corbin G Thompson; Myron S Cohen; Angela D M Kashuba
Journal:  J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 3.731

Review 2.  Phase I trials as valid therapeutic options for patients with cancer.

Authors:  Jacob J Adashek; Patricia M LoRusso; David S Hong; Razelle Kurzrock
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2019-09-02       Impact factor: 66.675

3.  Modeling of prolactin response following dopamine D2 receptor antagonists in rats: can it be translated to clinical dosing?

Authors:  Amit Taneja; An Vermeulen; Dymphy R H Huntjens; Meindert Danhof; Elizabeth C M De Lange; Johannes H Proost
Journal:  Pharmacol Res Perspect       Date:  2017-12

4.  The inclusion of real world evidence in clinical development planning.

Authors:  Reynaldo Martina; David Jenkins; Sylwia Bujkiewicz; Pascale Dequen; Keith Abrams
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2018-08-29       Impact factor: 2.279

5.  Combining Model-Based Clinical Trial Simulation, Pharmacoeconomics, and Value of Information to Optimize Trial Design.

Authors:  Daniel Hill-McManus; Dyfrig A Hughes
Journal:  CPT Pharmacometrics Syst Pharmacol       Date:  2020-12-31

6.  Conditional distribution modeling as an alternative method for covariates simulation: Comparison with joint multivariate normal and bootstrap techniques.

Authors:  Giovanni Smania; E Niclas Jonsson
Journal:  CPT Pharmacometrics Syst Pharmacol       Date:  2021-04

7.  Do single-arm trials have a role in drug development plans incorporating randomised trials?

Authors:  Michael J Grayling; Adrian P Mander
Journal:  Pharm Stat       Date:  2015-11-26       Impact factor: 1.894

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.