Literature DB >> 23585158

Multiplicity considerations for subgroup analysis subject to consistency constraint.

Mohamed Alosh1, Mohammad F Huque.   

Abstract

A significant heterogeneity in response across subgroups of a clinical trial implies that the average response from the overall population might not characterize the treatment effect; and as noted by different regulatory guidances, can cause concerns in interpreting study findings and might lead to restricting treatment labeling. However, along with the challenges raised by the heterogeneity, recently there has been growing interest in taking advantage of the expected variability in response across subgroups to increase the chance of success of a trial by designing the trial with objectives of establishing efficacy claims for the total population and a targeted subgroup. For such trials, there have been several approaches to address the multiplicity issue with the two paths of success. This manuscript advocates the utility of setting a threshold on the treatment effect for the subgroups at the design stage to guide determination of the population labeling when significant findings for the total population have been established. Specifically, it proposes that licensing treatment for the total population requires, in addition to significant findings for this population, that the treatment effect in the least benefited (complementary) subgroup meets the treatment effect threshold at a minimum; otherwise, the treatment would be restricted to the targeted subgroup only. Setting such a threshold can be based on clinical considerations, including toxicity and adverse events, in addition to treatment effect in the subgroup. This manuscript expands some of the multiplicity approaches to account for the threshold requirement and investigates the impact of the threshold requirement on study power.
© 2013 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23585158     DOI: 10.1002/bimj.201200065

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biom J        ISSN: 0323-3847            Impact factor:   2.207


  5 in total

Review 1.  Challenges and solutions to pre- and post-randomization subgroup analyses.

Authors:  Manisha Desai; Karen S Pieper; Ken Mahaffey
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2014       Impact factor: 2.931

Review 2.  Subgroup analyses in confirmatory clinical trials: time to be specific about their purposes.

Authors:  Julien Tanniou; Ingeborg van der Tweel; Steven Teerenstra; Kit C B Roes
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2016-02-18       Impact factor: 4.615

Review 3.  Methods for identification and confirmation of targeted subgroups in clinical trials: A systematic review.

Authors:  Thomas Ondra; Alex Dmitrienko; Tim Friede; Alexandra Graf; Frank Miller; Nigel Stallard; Martin Posch
Journal:  J Biopharm Stat       Date:  2016       Impact factor: 1.051

4.  Optimizing Trial Designs for Targeted Therapies.

Authors:  Thomas Ondra; Sebastian Jobjörnsson; Robert A Beckman; Carl-Fredrik Burman; Franz König; Nigel Stallard; Martin Posch
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-09-29       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  The clinicopathological and prognostic value of the pretreatment neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio in small cell lung cancer: A meta-analysis.

Authors:  Yan Lu; JinWen Jiang; ChaoXiang Ren
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-04-02       Impact factor: 3.240

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.