Fanni Soikkeli1, Mahmoud Hashim2, Mario Ouwens3, Maarten Postma4, Bart Heeg2. 1. Ingress Health, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. Electronic address: fanni.soikkeli@ingress-health.com. 2. Ingress Health, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. 3. AstraZeneca R&D, Mölndal, Sweden. 4. Department of Health Sciences, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To show how clinical trial data can be extrapolated using historical trial data-based a priori distributions. METHODS: Extrapolations based on 30-month pivotal multiple myeloma trial data were compared with 75-month data from the same trial. The 30-month data represent a typical decision-making scenario where early results from a clinical trial are extrapolated. Mature historical trial data with the same comparator as in the pivotal trial were incorporated in 2 stages. First, the parametric distribution selection was based on the historical trial data. Second, the shape parameter estimate of the historical trial was used to define an informative a priori distribution for the shape of the 30-month pivotal trial data. The method was compared with standard approaches, fitting parametric distributions to the 30-month data with noninformative prior. The predicted survival of each method was compared with the observed survival (ΔAUC) in the 75-month trial data. RESULTS: The Weibull had the best fit to the historical trial and the log-normal to the 30-month pivotal trial data. The ΔAUC of the Weibull with informative priors was considerably smaller compared with the standard Weibull. Also, the predicted median survival based on the Weibull with informative priors was more accurate (melphalan and prednisone [MP] 40 months, and bortezomib [V] combined with MP [VMP] 62 months) than based on the standard Weibull (MP 45 months and VMP 72 months) when compared with the observed median (MP 41.3 months and VMP 56.4 months). CONCLUSIONS: Extrapolation of clinical trial data is improved by using historical trial data-based informative a priori distributions.
OBJECTIVES: To show how clinical trial data can be extrapolated using historical trial data-based a priori distributions. METHODS: Extrapolations based on 30-month pivotal multiple myeloma trial data were compared with 75-month data from the same trial. The 30-month data represent a typical decision-making scenario where early results from a clinical trial are extrapolated. Mature historical trial data with the same comparator as in the pivotal trial were incorporated in 2 stages. First, the parametric distribution selection was based on the historical trial data. Second, the shape parameter estimate of the historical trial was used to define an informative a priori distribution for the shape of the 30-month pivotal trial data. The method was compared with standard approaches, fitting parametric distributions to the 30-month data with noninformative prior. The predicted survival of each method was compared with the observed survival (ΔAUC) in the 75-month trial data. RESULTS: The Weibull had the best fit to the historical trial and the log-normal to the 30-month pivotal trial data. The ΔAUC of the Weibull with informative priors was considerably smaller compared with the standard Weibull. Also, the predicted median survival based on the Weibull with informative priors was more accurate (melphalan and prednisone [MP] 40 months, and bortezomib [V] combined with MP [VMP] 62 months) than based on the standard Weibull (MP 45 months and VMP 72 months) when compared with the observed median (MP 41.3 months and VMP 56.4 months). CONCLUSIONS: Extrapolation of clinical trial data is improved by using historical trial data-based informative a priori distributions.
Authors: Derek S Chew; Zak Loring; Jatin Anand; Marat Fudim; Angela Lowenstern; Jennifer A Rymer; Kristin E D Weimer; Brett D Atwater; Adam D DeVore; Derek V Exner; Peter A Noseworthy; Clyde W Yancy; Daniel B Mark; Jonathan P Piccini Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes Date: 2020-12-07
Authors: Derek S Chew; Patricia A Cowper; Hussein Al-Khalidi; Kevin J Anstrom; Melanie R Daniels; Linda Davidson-Ray; Yanhong Li; Robert E Michler; Julio A Panza; Ileana L Piña; Jean L Rouleau; Eric J Velazquez; Daniel B Mark Journal: Circulation Date: 2022-01-19 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Victoria Federico Paly; Murat Kurt; Lirong Zhang; Marcus O Butler; Olivier Michielin; Adenike Amadi; Emma Hernlund; Helen M Johnson; Srividya Kotapati; Andriy Moshyk; John Borrill Journal: MDM Policy Pract Date: 2022-03-26
Authors: Hani Amir Aouissi; Ahmed Hamimes; Mostefa Ababsa; Lavinia Bianco; Christian Napoli; Feriel Kheira Kebaili; Andrey E Krauklis; Hafid Bouzekri; Kuldeep Dhama Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-08-04 Impact factor: 4.614
Authors: Dieter Ayers; Shannon Cope; Kevin Towle; Ali Mojebi; Thomas Marshall; Devender Dhanda Journal: BMC Med Res Methodol Date: 2022-10-15 Impact factor: 4.612
Authors: Bryony Langford; Alex Diamantopoulos; Toby M Maher; Yoshikazu Inoue; Klaus B Rohr; Michael Baldwin Journal: Adv Ther Date: 2021-12-27 Impact factor: 3.845