Literature DB >> 22302442

Predictive power to assist phase 3 go/no go decision based on phase 2 data on a different endpoint.

Shengyan Hong1, Li Shi.   

Abstract

One of the most critical decision points during drug development is to make a phase 3 go/no go decision after a phase 2 proof of concept trial is conducted. It is particularly challenging in oncology drug development where oftentimes the primary endpoint for phase 3 trial is overall survival (OS), but the phase 2 proof of concept trial is powered only for an early endpoint, typically progression-free survival (PFS), whose relationship to OS is often unclear. We propose the use of predictive power to assist the phase 3 go/no go decision by evaluating the strength of actual observed phase 2 efficacy effects in terms of how likely it will predict the chance of OS success in the subsequent phase 3 trial. The formula is provided for calculation of predictive power based on either observed PFS effect only, or observed OS effect only, or both. An example is provided to compare these three predictive powers, which shows that when there is little prior information about PFS and OS, the predictability based on the observed phase 2 PFS effect is low and not sensitive to the size of the trial and extent of the observed PFS effect, and it also has limited added value to the predictability based on the observed phase 2 OS effect. Therefore, one should be cautious of inherently high risk of making a phase 3 go/no go decision based on phase 2 PFS outcome alone and should take the phase 2 OS data into consideration whenever possible.
Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22302442     DOI: 10.1002/sim.4476

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stat Med        ISSN: 0277-6715            Impact factor:   2.373


  4 in total

1.  Quantitative decision making for investment in global health intervention trials: Case study of the NEWBORN study on emollient therapy in preterm infants in Kenya.

Authors:  Annie Stylianou; Keona J H Blanks; Rachel A Gibson; Lindsay K Kendall; Mike English; Sarah Williams; Roshni Mehta; Andrew Clarke; Lynn Kanyuuru; Jalemba Aluvaala; Gary L Darmstadt
Journal:  J Glob Health       Date:  2022-06-11       Impact factor: 7.664

2.  Conditional assurance: the answer to the questions that should be asked within drug development.

Authors:  Jane R Temple; Jon R Robertson
Journal:  Pharm Stat       Date:  2021-05-07       Impact factor: 1.234

3.  A Quantitative Process for Enhancing End of Phase 2 Decisions.

Authors:  Tony Sabin; James Matcham; Sarah Bray; Andrew Copas; Mahesh K B Parmar
Journal:  Stat Biopharm Res       Date:  2014-02-01       Impact factor: 1.452

4.  Model-Based Meta-Analysis for Multiple Myeloma: A Quantitative Drug-Independent Framework for Efficient Decisions in Oncology Drug Development.

Authors:  Zhaoyang Teng; Neeraj Gupta; Zhaowei Hua; Guohui Liu; Vivek Samnotra; Karthik Venkatakrishnan; Richard Labotka
Journal:  Clin Transl Sci       Date:  2017-11-23       Impact factor: 4.689

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.