Literature DB >> 20338905

A Bayesian dose-finding trial with adaptive dose expansion to flexibly assess efficacy and safety of an investigational drug.

Scott M Berry1, Walter Spinelli, Gary S Littman, John Z Liang, Parvin Fardipour, Donald A Berry, Roger J Lewis, Michael Krams.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Adaptive dose-ranging trials are more efficient than traditional approaches and may be designed to explicitly address the goals and decisions inherent in learn-phase drug development. We report the design, implementation, and outcome of an innovative Bayesian, response-adaptive, dose-ranging trial of an investigational drug in patients with diabetes, incorporating a dose expansion approach to flexibly address both efficacy and safety.
PURPOSE: The design was developed to assess whether one or more doses of an investigational drug demonstrated superior efficacy to an active control while maintaining an acceptable safety profile.
METHODS: The trial used a two-stage design, in which patients were initially allocated equally to placebo, investigational drug at a low and a medium dose, and an active control. Movement to the second stage was contingent upon evidence of efficacy (measured by change in fasting blood glucose) to add a very low dose of the investigational drug and of safety (measured by weight gain) to add a high dose of the investigational drug. The design incorporated a longitudinal model to maximize use of incomplete data, predictive probabilities to guide the decisions to terminate the trial for futility or move on to Stage 2, and a dose-response model in Stage 2 to borrow information across adjacent doses. Extensive simulations were used to fine tune trial parameters, to define operating characteristics, and to determine the required sample sizes. A data monitoring committee was provided with frequent reports to aid in trial oversight.
RESULTS: In Stage 1, as trial data accrued, the predictive probability that either the low or medium dose of the investigational drug was superior to the active control fell to low values. Stage 1 termination was recommended after 199 subjects were randomized, out of a maximum trial size of 500 subjects, and the final sample size was 218. Thus the trial did not progress to Stage 2. LIMITATIONS: Because of the relatively narrow dose range to be assessed, and the inability to utilize the highest dose at the beginning of the trial, a fully responsive-adaptive design incorporating dose-response modeling was not considered a viable option. This limited the efficiency gains possible with a full set of adaptive design elements.
CONCLUSIONS: The two-stage dose-expansion design functioned as designed, recommending early termination based on a low probability that the tested doses had efficacy greater than the active control.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20338905     DOI: 10.1177/1740774510361541

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Trials        ISSN: 1740-7745            Impact factor:   2.486


  15 in total

1.  Design considerations for dose-expansion cohorts in phase I trials.

Authors:  Alexia Iasonos; John O'Quigley
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2013-10-07       Impact factor: 44.544

2.  Building efficient comparative effectiveness trials through adaptive designs, utility functions, and accrual rate optimization: finding the sweet spot.

Authors:  Byron J Gajewski; Scott M Berry; Melanie Quintana; Mamatha Pasnoor; Mazen Dimachkie; Laura Herbelin; Richard Barohn
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2015-01-07       Impact factor: 2.373

3.  An overview of the adaptive designs accelerating promising trials into treatments (ADAPT-IT) project.

Authors:  William J Meurer; Roger J Lewis; Danilo Tagle; Michael D Fetters; Laurie Legocki; Scott Berry; Jason Connor; Valerie Durkalski; Jordan Elm; Wenle Zhao; Shirley Frederiksen; Robert Silbergleit; Yuko Palesch; Donald A Berry; William G Barsan
Journal:  Ann Emerg Med       Date:  2012-03-15       Impact factor: 5.721

4.  Bucindolol for the Maintenance of Sinus Rhythm in a Genotype-Defined HF Population: The GENETIC-AF Trial.

Authors:  Jonathan P Piccini; William T Abraham; Christopher Dufton; Ian A Carroll; Jeff S Healey; Dirk J van Veldhuisen; William H Sauer; Inder S Anand; Michel White; Stephen B Wilton; Ryan Aleong; Michiel Rienstra; Steven K Krueger; Felix Ayala-Paredes; Yaariv Khaykin; Bela Merkely; Vladimir Miloradović; Jerzy K Wranicz; Leonard Ilkhanoff; Paul D Ziegler; Gordon Davis; Laura L Emery; Debra Marshall; David P Kao; Michael R Bristow; Stuart J Connolly
Journal:  JACC Heart Fail       Date:  2019-04-29       Impact factor: 12.035

5.  Statistical justification of expansion cohorts in phase 1 cancer trials.

Authors:  Ali A Mokdad; Xian-Jin Xie; Hong Zhu; David E Gerber; Daniel F Heitjan
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2018-07-05       Impact factor: 6.860

6.  Advances in designs for Alzheimer's disease clinical trials.

Authors:  Jeffrey Cummings; Heath Gould; Kate Zhong
Journal:  Am J Neurodegener Dis       Date:  2012-11-18

7.  A novel evaluation of optimality for randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Jo Wick; Scott M Berry; Hung-Wen Yeh; Won Choi; Christina M Pacheco; Christine Daley; Byron J Gajewski
Journal:  J Biopharm Stat       Date:  2016-06-13       Impact factor: 1.051

8.  A phase I/II seamless dose escalation/expansion with adaptive randomization scheme (SEARS).

Authors:  Haitao Pan; Fang Xie; Ping Liu; Jielai Xia; Yuan Ji
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2013-10-17       Impact factor: 2.486

9.  An adaptive, phase II, dose-finding clinical trial design to evaluate L-carnitine in the treatment of septic shock based on efficacy and predictive probability of subsequent phase III success.

Authors:  Roger J Lewis; Kert Viele; Kristine Broglio; Scott M Berry; Alan E Jones
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 7.598

10.  Advancing clinical trial design in pulmonary hypertension.

Authors:  Andy P Grieve; Shien-Chung Chow; John Curram; Stephen Dawe; Lutz O Harnisch; Noreen R Henig; Hsien Ming J Hung; D Dunbar Ivy; Steven M Kawut; Mohammad H Rahbar; Shen Xiao; Martin R Wilkins
Journal:  Pulm Circ       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 3.017

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.