Longitudinal Analysis Beyond effect size

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
METHODOLOGY FOR META- ANALYSIS OF TIME TO EVENT TYPE OUTCOMES TO INFORM ECONOMIC EVALUATIONS Nicola Cooper, Alex Sutton, Keith Abrams Department of Health.
Advertisements

Controversies in Adjuvant Therapy for Pancreatic Cancer Parag Sanghvi M.D. Tasha McDonald M.D. Department of Radiation Medicine OHSU.
Modified Megestrol The Clinical Trials by : Carolina R. Akib
Sandrine Dudoit1 Microarray Experimental Design and Analysis Sandrine Dudoit jointly with Yee Hwa Yang Division of Biostatistics, UC Berkeley
Stat 512 – Lecture 13 Chi-Square Analysis (Ch. 8).
Drug/Disease Modeling & Simulation in Oncology Mendel Jansen Director Modeling & Simulation Translational Medicine & Clinical Pharmacology, Daiichi Sankyo.
Sample Size Determination
CALGB/SWOG 80405: Phase III trial of FOLFIRI or FOLFOX with Bevacizumab or Cetuximab for patients w/ KRAS wild type untreated metastatic adenocarcinoma.
Phase II Design Strategies Sally Hunsberger Ovarian Cancer Clinical Trials Planning Meeting May 29, 2009.
Sample Size Determination Ziad Taib March 7, 2014.
Diabetes mellitus and the incidence and time to onset of oxaliplatin-induced peripheral sensory neuropathy in patients with colorectal cancer: A pooled.
Dr Laura Bonnett Department of Biostatistics. UNDERSTANDING SURVIVAL ANALYSIS.
Hormone Refractory Prostate Cancer A Regulatory Perspective of End Points to Measure Safety and Efficacy of Drugs Hormone Refractory Prostate Cancer Bhupinder.
Phase III studies of Xeloda® in colorectal cancer (CRC)
Optimal cost-effective Go-No Go decisions Cong Chen*, Ph.D. Robert A. Beckman, M.D. *Director, Merck & Co., Inc. EFSPI, Basel, June 2010.
Assessing ETA Violations, and Selecting Attainable/Realistic Parameters Causal Effect/Variable Importance Estimation and the Experimental Treatment Assumption.
The Impact of Capecitabine and Oxaliplatin in the Preoperative Multimodality Treatment of Patients with Carcinoma of the Rectum: NSABP R-04 1 Capecitabine.
The time to progression ratio for phase II trials of personalized medicine Marc Buyse, ScD IDDI, Louvain-la-Neuve, and I-BioStat, Hasselt University, Belgium.
Modeling of Longitudinal Tumor Size Data in Clinical Oncology Studies of Drugs in Combination N. Frances 1, L. Claret 2, F. Schaedeli Stark 3, R. Bruno.
Phase III trial of chemotherapy with or without irinotecan in the front-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer in elderly patients. FFCD
BASED ON PROTOCOL VERSION 1 SEPTEMBER 2012 A new study evaluating an investigational drug to treat patients with HER2-positive metastatic gastroesophageal.
Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices The BfArM is a Federal Institute within the portfolio of the Federal Ministry of Health (BMG) The use of.
Using Predictive Classifiers in the Design of Phase III Clinical Trials Richard Simon, D.Sc. Chief, Biometric Research Branch National Cancer Institute.
Some Design Issues in Microbicide Trials August 20, 2003 Thomas R. Fleming, Ph.D. Professor and Chair of Biostatistics University of Washington FDA Antiviral.
 An exposure-response (E-R) analysis in oncology aims at describing the relationship between drug exposure and survival and in addition aims at comparing.
Adjuvant Therapy of Colon Cancer: Where are we now ? Leonard Saltz, MD Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center New York, NY.
Phase II Study of Sunitinib Administered in a Continuous Once-Daily Dosing Regimen in Patients With Cytokine-Refractory Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma.
1 Tom Edgar’s Contribution to Model Reduction as an introduction to Global Sensitivity Analysis Procedure Accounting for Effect of Available Experimental.
Results Abstract Analysis of Prognostic Web-based Models for Stage II and III Colon Cancer: A Population-based Validation of Numeracy and Adjuvant! Online.
Pharmacogenetics of Irinotecan Clinical perspectives: utility of genotyping Mark J. Ratain, MD University of Chicago 11/3/04.
CON - 1 Conclusions C David R. Parkinson Vice President, Global Head, Clinical Research and Development Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation.
Response, PFS or OS – what is the best endpoint in advanced colorectal cancer? Marc Buyse IDDI, Louvain-la-Neuve & Hasselt University
REGRESSION MODEL FITTING & IDENTIFICATION OF PROGNOSTIC FACTORS BISMA FAROOQI.
Results of a Phase 2, Multicenter, Single-Arm Study of Eribulin Mesylate as First-Line Therapy for Locally Recurrent or Metastatic HER2-Negative Breast.
Lung Cancer Cell Line Nº StudiesStrainNº Mice H44113Athymic nude119 A5492CB-17scid15 Calu-62CD-1 nu/nu25 H16501Athymic nude8 H19751Athymic nude8 H21226Athymic.
Simulation setup Model parameters for simulations were tuned using repeated measurement data from multiple in-house completed studies and baseline data.
Conflict of Interest I have acted as a Consultant on an education workshop organised by Gilead Sciences.
 Adaptive Enrichment Designs for Confirmatory Clinical Trials Specifying the Intended Use Population and Estimating the Treatment Effect Richard Simon,
for Overall Prognosis Workshop Cochrane Colloquium, Seoul
Patient Focused Drug Development An FDA Perspective
Is High Placebo Response Really a Problem in Clinical Trials?
Impact of censoring on the statistical methods for handling non-proportional hazards in Immuno-Oncology studies Yifan Huang, Luping Zhao, Jiabu Ye, and.
Using extrapolation to support a pediatric investigational plan: an application in liver transplantation development Thomas Dumortier, Martin Fink, Ovidiu.
Vahdat L et al. Proc SABCS 2012;Abstract P
Presented By Luca Malorni at 2017 ASCO Annual Meeting
KEYNOTE-012: Durable Efficacy With Pembrolizumab in PD-L1–Positive Gastric Cancer CCO Independent Conference Highlights of the 2015 ASCO Annual Meeting*
Statistical Data Analysis
Intervista a Lucio Crinò
Strategies for Implementing Flexible Clinical Trials Jerald S. Schindler, Dr.P.H. Cytel Pharmaceutical Research Services 2006 FDA/Industry Statistics Workshop.
Positive Impacts of Developing Novel Endpoints Generated by Mobile Technology for Use in Clinical Trials* SPECIFIC BENEFITS   SHORT-TERM MEDIUM-TERM LONG-TERM.
Barrios C et al. SABCS 2009;Abstract 46.
Clinical Pharmacokinetics
Krop I et al. SABCS 2009;Abstract 5090.
Vitolo U et al. Proc ASH 2011;Abstract 777.
Baselga J et al. SABCS 2009;Abstract 45.
Predictive Performance of a Myelosuppression Model for Dose Individualization; Impact of Type and Amount of Information Provided Johan E. Wallin, Lena.
Time-dependent patterns of treatment effect and failure as an explanation for the predictive role of deficient mismatch repair (dMMR) in stage II and III.
Elements of a statistical test Statistical null hypotheses
Capecitabine versus 5-fluorouracil-based (neo-)adjuvant chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer: safety results of a randomized phase III.
EVENT PROJECTION Minzhao Liu, 2018
What are their purposes? What kinds?
Martin M et al. Proc SABCS 2012;Abstract S1-7.
LV5FU2-cisplatin followed by gemcitabine or the reverse sequence in metastatic pancreatic cancer: Preliminary results of a randomized phase III trial (FFCD.
JSM 2018 A Case Study on Model Based Meta Analysis (MBMA) for Drug Development Decisions Guohui Liu, Zhaoyang Teng, Zoe Hua, Neeraj Gupta, Karthik Venkatakrishnan,
Danni Yu Eli Lilly and Company (Tue)
with application in a phase II study
Björn Bornkamp, Georgina Bermann
Evidence Based Diagnosis
Yu Du, PhD Research Scientist Eli Lilly and Company
How Should We Select and Define Trial Estimands
Presentation transcript:

Longitudinal Analysis Beyond effect size Cheikh Diack & Nicolas Frey M&S - Translational Research Sciences EFSPI 13th September 2012

Only size (of effect) matters Only size (of effect) matters! The benefit of a treatment is given by the size of its impact on clinical endpoints baseline EFFECT SIZE TIME last visit Two time points are adequate to estimate the size of effect The path from baseline to last visit also matters

Integrating the dynamic of the response Modeling the system not the data Can we differentiate the system parameters from the drug parameters ? What do we do with such information? Predict the effect of new drugs on the system Long term prediction (e.g.: clinical endpoint) Detect sub-population and understand their behaviors? ... Avastin: relative change of tumor size from Baseline Relative change Time (week)

Predicting survival of a phase III trial from a longitudinal tumor response in phase II trial XELODA (Capecitabine) in CRC 5-FU Phase III XELODA (Capecitabine) Phase II Tumor Model Treatment: Constant Cell kill rate Resistance apparition rate Treatment: Constant Cell kill rate Resistance apparition rate Tumor Model XELODA (Capecitabine) Phase III Tumor  W6 Tumor  W6 ? Patients: Tumor growth rate Tumor size at baseline Patients: Tumor growth rate Tumor size at baseline Survival Model Survival Model

The model describes sum of tumor larger diameters in function of time and doses The tumor is assumed to grow naturally over time with a certain rate. The drug is assumed to affect the tumor with a constant-cell-kill rate. The dose driving the effect is exactly the amount administered at each time. (i.e. No dose kinetic is considered in this model) Resistance apparition is introduced by considering that the killing rate of the drug decreases exponentially with time. Resistance starts after 1st dose administration and is independent of the dose amount. Resistance is an individual specific characteristic.

Final parameter estimates Tumor growth rate was estimated (~1 Final parameter estimates Tumor growth rate was estimated (~1.5 times) higher in Phase 2 than Phase 3 Tumor growth rate from Phase III 5-FU was used for Capecitabine Phase III simulation

Tumor size time course: predicted vs. observed Capecitabine 5-FU

Predicted tumor reduction at week 6 (5-FU) Obs: 0.053 Pred: 0.047 (0.026-0.073) Obs: 0.042 Pred: 0.047 (0.026-0.073)

CRC Survival model build on 5-FU Parametric model assumed a lognormal distribution of survival times Observations: 505 Total; 9 Censored

Predicted Survival (5-FU) Obs: 366 Pred: 373 (337-411) Obs: 401 Pred: 387 (349-431)

Predicting survival for a phase III trial Capecitabine Sampling for simulations: baseline tumor size from 5-FU patients dosing history of patients from Phase 2 data - drug parameter tumor model parameters from uncertainty and inter-individual variability: Constant cell kill rate from Phase 2 parameters - drug parameter resistance rate were drawn from Phase 2 parameters - drug parameter Tumor growth rate from 5-FU studies survival model parameters from uncertainty

Predicted Survival (Capecitabine)

Summary The dose-tumor size-survival model was qualified to predict 5-FU survival. Capecitabine Phase III survival were predicted from Phase II tumor measure. Further work has shown that the structure of the tumor size model is robust in at least two tumor types (BC and CRC) This approach may be useful tool for decision making

Overall conclusion The characterization of the system parameters may allow to extrapolate from short term to long term effect Similar mechanistic approaches work in other disease areas such as Diabetes and HCV There are different techniques from empirical to more mechanistic approaches for the analysis of longitudinal of data More synergy between Biostatistics and M&S is needed to improve the quantitative support to drug development

Acknowledgements Valerie Cosson Franziska Schaedeli Ronald Gieschke And… many others Tumor size

We Innovate Healthcare

New Data Predict “SO14796” from SO14695 Data The model survival predictions (n=301 patients)

What is the process leading to the observed response? baseline EFFECT SIZE TIME last visit Are we here? Are we here? The path from baseline to last visit also matters

A dose-tumor-survival model for advanced and/or metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) treated by Capecitabine and 5-FU To predict survival and difference in Phase 3 Capecitabine versus 5-FU Data Capecitabine from one Phase II SO14797 (35 pts) 5-FU arm data from two Phase III SO14695 (304 pts) and SO14796 (301 pts) Capecitabine arm from the two Phase III studies was only released when the predictions were in Models Tumor size model for Capecitabine developed from Phase 2 data Tumor size model for 5-FU developed from Phase 3 data Survival model developed from 5-FU Phase 3 Data

Difference between arms across the 1000 replicates Survival difference between arms is difficult to show with 604 patients per arm

Predicted survival All studies (604 patients per arm)