Dena R Howard1, Anna Hockaday2, Julia M Brown2, Walter M Gregory2, Susan Todd3, Tahla Munir4, Jamie B Oughton2, Claire Dimbleby2, Peter Hillmen4,5. 1. Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK. dena.howard@roche.com. 2. Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK. 3. Department of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Reading, Reading, UK. 4. St James's Institute of Oncology, St James's University Hospital, Leeds, UK. 5. Section of Experimental Haematology, Leeds Institute of Cancer and Pathology, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The FLAIR trial in chronic lymphocytic leukaemia has a randomised, controlled, open-label, confirmatory, platform design. FLAIR was successfully amended to include an emerging promising experimental therapy to expedite its assessment, greatly reducing the time to reach the primary outcome compared to running a separate trial and without compromising the validity of the research or the ability to recruit to the trial and report the outcomes. The methodological and practical issues are presented, describing how they were addressed to ensure the amendment was a success. METHODS:FLAIR was designed as a two-arm trial requiring 754 patients. In stage 2, two new arms were added: a new experimental arm and a second control arm to protect the trial in case of a change in practice. In stage 3, the original experimental arm was closed as its planned recruitment target was reached. In total, 1516 participants will be randomised to the trial. RESULTS: The changes to the protocol and randomisation to add and stop arms were made seamlessly without pausing recruitment. The statistical considerations to ensure the results for the original and new hypotheses are unbiased were approved following peer review by oversight committees, Cancer Research UK, ethical and regulatory committees and pharmaceutical partners. These included the use of concurrent comparators in case of any stage effect, appropriate control of the type I error rate and consideration of analysis methods across trial stages. The operational aspects of successfully implementing the amendments are described, including gaining approvals and additional funding, data management requirements and implementation at centres. CONCLUSIONS:FLAIR is an exemplar of how an emerging experimental therapy can be assessed within an existing trial structure without compromising the conduct, reporting or validity of the trial. This strategy offered considerable resource savings and allowed the new experimental therapy to be assessed within a confirmatory trial in the UK years earlier than would have otherwise been possible. Despite the clear efficiencies, treatment arms are rarely added to ongoing trials in practice. This paper demonstrates how this strategy is acceptable, feasible and beneficial to patients and the wider research community. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN01844152 . Registered on August 08, 2014.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: The FLAIR trial in chronic lymphocytic leukaemia has a randomised, controlled, open-label, confirmatory, platform design. FLAIR was successfully amended to include an emerging promising experimental therapy to expedite its assessment, greatly reducing the time to reach the primary outcome compared to running a separate trial and without compromising the validity of the research or the ability to recruit to the trial and report the outcomes. The methodological and practical issues are presented, describing how they were addressed to ensure the amendment was a success. METHODS: FLAIR was designed as a two-arm trial requiring 754 patients. In stage 2, two new arms were added: a new experimental arm and a second control arm to protect the trial in case of a change in practice. In stage 3, the original experimental arm was closed as its planned recruitment target was reached. In total, 1516 participants will be randomised to the trial. RESULTS: The changes to the protocol and randomisation to add and stop arms were made seamlessly without pausing recruitment. The statistical considerations to ensure the results for the original and new hypotheses are unbiased were approved following peer review by oversight committees, Cancer Research UK, ethical and regulatory committees and pharmaceutical partners. These included the use of concurrent comparators in case of any stage effect, appropriate control of the type I error rate and consideration of analysis methods across trial stages. The operational aspects of successfully implementing the amendments are described, including gaining approvals and additional funding, data management requirements and implementation at centres. CONCLUSIONS: FLAIR is an exemplar of how an emerging experimental therapy can be assessed within an existing trial structure without compromising the conduct, reporting or validity of the trial. This strategy offered considerable resource savings and allowed the new experimental therapy to be assessed within a confirmatory trial in the UK years earlier than would have otherwise been possible. Despite the clear efficiencies, treatment arms are rarely added to ongoing trials in practice. This paper demonstrates how this strategy is acceptable, feasible and beneficial to patients and the wider research community. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN01844152 . Registered on August 08, 2014.
Authors: Matthew R Sydes; Mahesh K B Parmar; Malcolm D Mason; Noel W Clarke; Claire Amos; John Anderson; Johann de Bono; David P Dearnaley; John Dwyer; Charlene Green; Gordana Jovic; Alastair W S Ritchie; J Martin Russell; Karen Sanders; George Thalmann; Nicholas D James Journal: Trials Date: 2012-09-15 Impact factor: 2.279
Authors: Francesca Schiavone; Riya Bathia; Krishna Letchemanan; Lindsey Masters; Claire Amos; Anna Bara; Louise Brown; Clare Gilson; Cheryl Pugh; Nafisah Atako; Fleur Hudson; Mahesh Parmar; Ruth Langley; Richard S Kaplan; Chris Parker; Gert Attard; Noel W Clarke; Silke Gillessen; Nicholas D James; Tim Maughan; Matthew R Sydes Journal: Trials Date: 2019-05-29 Impact factor: 2.279
Authors: Peter Hillmen; Andy C Rawstron; Kristian Brock; Samuel Muñoz-Vicente; Francesca J Yates; Rebecca Bishop; Rebecca Boucher; Donald MacDonald; Christopher Fegan; Alison McCaig; Anna Schuh; Andrew Pettitt; John G Gribben; Piers E M Patten; Stephen Devereux; Adrian Bloor; Christopher P Fox; Francesco Forconi; Talha Munir Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2019-07-11 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Sarah P Blagden; Lucinda Billingham; Louise C Brown; Sean W Buckland; Alison M Cooper; Stephanie Ellis; Wendy Fisher; Helen Hughes; Debbie A Keatley; Francois M Maignen; Alex Morozov; Will Navaie; Sarah Pearson; Abeer Shaaban; Kirsty Wydenbach; Pamela R Kearns Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2020-01-06 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Mahesh K B Parmar; Matthew R Sydes; Sharon B Love; Fay Cafferty; Claire Snowdon; Karen Carty; Joshua Savage; Philip Pallmann; Lucy McParland; Louise Brown; Lindsey Masters; Francesca Schiavone; Dominic Hague; Stephen Townsend; Claire Amos; Annabelle South; Kate Sturgeon; Ruth Langley; Timothy Maughan; Nicholas James; Emma Hall; Sarah Kernaghan; Judith Bliss; Nick Turner; Andrew Tutt; Christina Yap; Charlotte Firth; Anthony Kong; Hisham Mehanna; Colin Watts; Robert Hills; Ian Thomas; Mhairi Copland; Sue Bell; David Sebag-Montefiore; Robert Jones Journal: Trials Date: 2022-09-06 Impact factor: 2.728