Literature DB >> 31907713

Evaluation of non-linear-mixed-effect modeling to reduce the sample sizes of pediatric trials in type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Clémence Rigaux1, Bernard Sébastien2.   

Abstract

Recruitment for pediatric trials in Type II Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM) is very challenging, necessitating the exploration of new approaches for reducing the sample sizes of pediatric trials. This work aimed at assessing if a longitudinal Non-Linear-Mixed-Effect (NLME) analysis of T2DM trial could be more powerful and thus require fewer patients than two standard statistical analyses commonly used as primary or sensitivity efficacy analysis: Last-Observation-Carried-Forward (LOCF) followed by (co)variance (AN(C)OVA) analysis at the evaluation time-point, and Mixed-effects Model Repeated Measures (MMRM) analysis. Standard T2DM efficacy studies were simulated, with glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) as the main endpoint, 24 weeks' study duration, 2 arms, assuming a placebo and a treatment effect, exploring three different scenarios for the evolution of HbA1c, and accounting for a dropout phenomenon. 1000 trials were simulated, then analyzed using the 3 analyses, whose powers were compared. As expected, the longitudinal modeling MMRM analysis was found to be more powerful than the LOCF + ANOVA analysis at week 24. The NLME analysis gave slightly more accurate drug-effect estimations than the two other methods, however it tended to slightly overestimate the magnitude of the drug effect, and it was more powerful than the MMRM analysis only in some scenarios of slow HbA1c decrease. The gain in power afforded by NLME was more apparent when two additional assessments enriched the design; however, the gain was not systematic for all scenarios. Finally, this work showed that NLME analyses may help to reduce significantly the required sample sizes in T2DM pediatric studies, but only for enriched designs and slow HbA1c decrease.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Mixed-effects model repeated measures; Non-linear-mixed-effects models; Pediatric extrapolation; Power comparison; Type 2 diabetes mellitus

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 31907713     DOI: 10.1007/s10928-019-09668-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn        ISSN: 1567-567X            Impact factor:   2.745


  15 in total

1.  Handling drop-out in longitudinal clinical trials: a comparison of the LOCF and MMRM approaches.

Authors:  Peter Lane
Journal:  Pharm Stat       Date:  2008 Apr-Jun       Impact factor: 1.894

2.  Simple pharmacometric tools for oral anti-diabetic drug development: competitive landscape for oral non-insulin therapies in type 2 diabetes.

Authors:  Mahesh N Samtani
Journal:  Biopharm Drug Dispos       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 1.627

3.  A clinical trial to maintain glycemic control in youth with type 2 diabetes.

Authors:  Phil Zeitler; Kathryn Hirst; Laura Pyle; Barbara Linder; Kenneth Copeland; Silva Arslanian; Leona Cuttler; David M Nathan; Sherida Tollefsen; Denise Wilfley; Francine Kaufman
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2012-04-29       Impact factor: 91.245

4.  Diabetes control with reciprocal peer support versus nurse care management: a randomized trial.

Authors:  Michele Heisler; Sandeep Vijan; Fatima Makki; John D Piette
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2010-10-19       Impact factor: 25.391

5.  Extrapolation of Efficacy in Pediatric Drug Development and Evidence-based Medicine: Progress and Lessons Learned.

Authors:  Haihao Sun; Jean W Temeck; Wiley Chambers; Ginger Perkins; Renan Bonnel; Dianne Murphy
Journal:  Ther Innov Regul Sci       Date:  2017-08-18       Impact factor: 1.778

6.  Comparisons of Analysis Methods for Proof-of-Concept Trials.

Authors:  K E Karlsson; C Vong; M Bergstrand; E N Jonsson; M O Karlsson
Journal:  CPT Pharmacometrics Syst Pharmacol       Date:  2013-01-16

7.  Comparison of nateglinide and gliclazide in combination with metformin, for treatment of patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus inadequately controlled on maximum doses of metformin alone.

Authors:  S Ristic; C Collober-Maugeais; E Pecher; F Cressier
Journal:  Diabet Med       Date:  2006-07       Impact factor: 4.359

Review 8.  Youth-Onset Type 2 Diabetes Consensus Report: Current Status, Challenges, and Priorities.

Authors:  Kristen J Nadeau; Barbara J Anderson; Erika G Berg; Jane L Chiang; Hubert Chou; Kenneth C Copeland; Tamara S Hannon; Terry T-K Huang; Jane L Lynch; Jeff Powell; Elizabeth Sellers; William V Tamborlane; Philip Zeitler
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2016-08-02       Impact factor: 19.112

9.  A novel model-based meta-analysis to indirectly estimate the comparative efficacy of two medications: an example using DPP-4 inhibitors, sitagliptin and linagliptin, in treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Authors:  Jorge Luiz Gross; James Rogers; Daniel Polhamus; William Gillespie; Christian Friedrich; Yan Gong; Brigitta Ursula Monz; Sanjay Patel; Alexander Staab; Silke Retlich
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2013-03-05       Impact factor: 2.692

10.  “TODAY” reflects on the changing “faces” of type 2 diabetes.

Authors:  William T Cefalu
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 19.112

View more
  5 in total

Review 1.  Developing and Evaluating Behaviour Change Interventions for People with Younger-Onset Type 2 Diabetes: Lessons and Recommendations from Existing Programmes.

Authors:  Amelia J Lake; Anne Bo; Michelle Hadjiconstantinou
Journal:  Curr Diab Rep       Date:  2021-12-13       Impact factor: 4.810

2.  Mathematical Modelling for Optimal Vaccine Dose Finding: Maximising Efficacy and Minimising Toxicity.

Authors:  John Benest; Sophie Rhodes; Thomas G Evans; Richard G White
Journal:  Vaccines (Basel)       Date:  2022-05-11

3.  Improved Decision-Making Confidence Using Item-Based Pharmacometric Model: Illustration with a Phase II Placebo-Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Carolina Llanos-Paez; Claire Ambery; Shuying Yang; Maggie Tabberer; Misba Beerahee; Elodie L Plan; Mats O Karlsson
Journal:  AAPS J       Date:  2021-06-02       Impact factor: 4.009

4.  Improved Confidence in a Confirmatory Stage by Application of Item-Based Pharmacometrics Model: Illustration with a Phase III Active Comparator-Controlled Trial in COPD Patients.

Authors:  Carolina Llanos-Paez; Claire Ambery; Shuying Yang; Misba Beerahee; Elodie L Plan; Mats O Karlsson
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2022-03-01       Impact factor: 4.580

5.  Sweet/Fat Preference Taste in Subjects Who are Lean, Obese and Very Obese.

Authors:  Jennifer Leohr; Maria C Kjellsson
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2020-11-19       Impact factor: 4.200

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.