PERFORM Aspirin 100 mg/day vs terutroban 30 mg/d

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
CMRSC Division of Hematology/Oncology
Advertisements

The Role of the IRB An Institutional Review Board (IRB) is a review committee established to help protect the rights and welfare of human research subjects.
The Principal Investigator’s Roles and Responsibilities Chicken Soup for the Busy Coordinator (May 2010)
The role of the Statistician in Data Monitoring Committees (DMC) Fritz Schindel Accovion GmbH Marburg - Germany.
Strengthening the Medical Device Clinical Trial Enterprise
Participation Requirements for a Guideline Panel PGIN Representative.
IRB Determinations 1. AAHRPP Site Visit Results Site visitors observed a real commitment to human subject protections Investigator and research staff.
Elements of a clinical trial research protocol
GCP compliance for GenISIS  This presentation is intended for clinical staff involved in recruiting patients to the GenISIS (Genetics of Influenza Susceptibility.
How does the process work? Submissions in 2007 (n=13,043) Perspectives.
The ICH E5 Question and Answer Document Status and Content Robert T. O’Neill, Ph.D. Director, Office of Biostatistics, CDER, FDA Presented at the 4th Kitasato-Harvard.
Promoting Excellence in Family Medicine Enabling Patients to Access Electronic Health Records Guidance for Health Professionals.
Accredited Member of the Association of Clinical Research Professionals, USA Tips on clinical trials Maha Al-Farhan B.Sc, M.Phil., M.B.A., D.I.C.
Adverse Events, Unanticipated Problems, Protocol Deviations & other Safety Information Which Form 4 to Use?
THE ROLE OF DSMB’s in CLINICAL RESEARCH Data and Safety Monitoring Monitoring.
Andrew Thornton, Chairman, RAH HREC
MODULE B: Case Report Forms Jane Fendl & Denise Thwing April 7, Version: Final 07-Apr-2010.
Regulatory Requirements and Guidelines for DSMB’s ….Or ‘who-advises-what’ in regard to DSMB’s.
GCP & ETHICS COMMITTEES Ravi Rengachari Vector Control Research Centre PONDICHERRY.
Mass BioTech Council DMC Presentation Statistical Considerations Philip Lavin, Ph.D. October 30, 2007.
Ulla Lønberg – International Safety & Pharmacovigilance – H. Lundbeck A/S21-Feb-2007 Data Monitoring Committees.
Continuing Review Presented by: Karen Jeans, PhD, CCRN, CIP Program Analyst, COACH.
Elements of Ethical Review of Study Documents Dr.C.H.Shashindran Director-Professor & Head Department of Pharmacology JIPMER.
What about VIOXX?. Adenomatous Polyp Prevention on Vioxx (APPROVe) Vioxx (rofecoxib) versus Placebo Basic Clinical Trial Objective: Assess whether Vioxx.
GCP (GOOD CLINICAL PRACTISE)
Responsibilities of Sponsor, Investigator and Monitor
ICORD 2006 Kerstin Westermark Md, PhD, Assoc. prof. COMP Chairperson.
A capacity building programme for patient representatives
REFLECT: Recovery Following Intensive Care Treatment
REFLECT: Recovery Following Intensive Care Treatment
COCE Institutional Review Board Academic Spotlight
Responsibilities of Sponsor, Investigator and Monitor
CONDUCTING THE TRIAL AT
MAINTAINING THE INVESTIGATOR’S SITE FILE
Practical Implications Laura Lovato, Biostatistician
Evidence-based Medicine
CLINICAL PROTOCOL DEVELOPMENT
FDA’s IDE Decisions and Communications
What is a Data and Safety Monitoring Plan and how do I get one?
on behalf of the TARDIS Investigators
Coaching & Progressive Discipline
Statistical Approaches to Support Device Innovation- FDA View
REGULATORY PROBLEMS IN CARING OUT PRE- AND POST- AUTHORISATION CLINICAL TRIALS Dr Penka Decheva GCP Inspector, BDA.
Within Trial Decisions: Unblinding and Termination
Watching From Above: The Role of the DSMB
UK Legal Requirement for Notification of Serious Breaches of Good Clinical Practice or The Trial Protocol John Poland, PhD Senior Director, Regulatory.
10. Overview on risk communication and new knowledge integration
Critical Reading of Clinical Study Results
NHLBI Perspective Yves Rosenberg, M.D, M.P.H.
Decision Making Process
Data Monitoring Committees: Current Issues and Challenges Some Discussion Points Jim Neaton University of Minnesota.
The results are in: now what?
3rd Year Psychology Project PSY600
Sue Todd Department of Mathematics and Statistics
The DMC’s role in monitoring futility
Participants’ Rights Participants of clinical trials have rights, and they are protected under law when participating in clinical trials. The informed.
Statistical considerations for the Nipah virus treatment study
Statistical considerations for the Nipah virus treatment study
MAINTAINING THE INVESTIGATOR’S STUDY FILE
IND Review Process Seoul National University
Health (regulation of Termination of Pregnancy)Bill 2018
Cindy Murray NP Princess Margaret Cancer Centre
Masoud Solaymani-Dodaran Iran University of Medical Sciences
TRTO (Translational Research Trials Office)
Matthew Sherman’s Comments to P&P
Adult Education Survey Anonymisation Point 6
Quality Assurance in Clinical Trials
Natasa Rajicic, ScD July 31, 2019
How Should We Select and Define Trial Estimands
Handling of protocol deviations (PDs)
Presentation transcript:

PERFORM Aspirin 100 mg/day vs terutroban 30 mg/d TP receptor antagonist (thromboxane and prostaglandin endoperoxide PGG2-PGH2 receptors) Data until 07/09/09. Mean patient follow-up 2.1 years How many primary end points were analyzed ? n=1863 Prematurely stopped because terutorban v.v. unlikely to offer benefit over aspirin No evidence of harm form terutroban Oct 2009 publication to follow Reason for premature discontinuation What finding has led to this decision ? The Data Monitoring Committee (DMC), during their last meeting, based on their review of the endpoint data, concluded that no evidence of harm was observed but that the study was most unlikely to demonstrate any benefit from the use of the drug as compared to aspirin. Is there a safety concern ? No evidence of harm was observed, according to the DMC who reviewed the endpoint data. Are there more bleedings with S18886 ? The DMC did not express any concern about bleedings, and the reason for stopping the trial is not a safety issue. Are there signs that aspirin is better than S18886 ? No, the DMC did not say that aspirin was better than S18886. They concluded that the study was most unlikely to demonstrate any benefit from the use of the drug as compared to aspirin. Is there an ethical concern or is it more an economical concern ? Since, the DMC stated that the study was most unlikely to demonstrate any benefit from the use of the drug as compared to aspirin, the Executive Committee in agreement with the Sponsor decided that the study should be stopped. Should we consider the stopping of the trial as a safety measure ? No, the DMC stated that there is no evidence of harm. When was this decision taken ? During the last Executive Committee meeting, on 23 October 2009. By whom was this decision taken ? By the Executive Committee, in agreement with the Sponsor, based on the recommendation of the DMC.   Regulatory aspects When should we inform EC/CA about this decision ? Before 6 November (within 15 days after decision, according to SOP STE/004/03). How should we inform EC/CA about this decision ? According regulatory requirements, based on documentation prepared by presubmission division and TRD. Will it be necessary to wait for their approval before starting to perform the final visits ? No, there is no approval to be expected since it is an information letter, except if local regulatory requirement. Will you prepare a protocol amendment to describe the premature end of the trial ? No need for amendment, premature discontinuation of the study was planned in protocol (see section 8.5). When do you plan to finish the intermediate premature end-of-trial report and the final study report ? Dates are not planned yet. Patients How and when should we inform the patients about this decision ? During the next visit, the investigator will inform the patient about this decision. The investigator will be instructed how he will have to proceed as soon as possible. Will they receive an information letter (to be signed) at their final visit ? We will follow the local regulatory requirements. Should we ask the patients to come back for a visit as soon as possible ? Investigators will be encouraged to anticipate the last visit in order to finish all final visits before ( date on discussion with the Top Management). Do investigators have the right to call back all their patients immediately and get them off study medication ? Since the DMC stated that there is no harm, it is not mandatory to call back all the patients immediately and get them off study medication, but the investigators are free to do so. Practical organisation When can investigators start to perform final visits ? After notification to ECs, i.e. 6 November 2009, except if local regulatory requirement. How will this final visit look like ? Complete final visit (section 8.2.2 of the protocol). When will be the LVLP ? LVLP on discussion by Top Management. The decision will be made in the next days. When will the data base be locked ? Date is not planned yet. In the new context, is it still necessary to perform the dementia evaluation at the final visit ? Yes, it will be a planned final visit. Will the ancillary projects continue until the last visit or will they be stopped immediately ? They will not be stopped immediately. Specific instructions will be given in the next days. Are investigators free to choose the follow-up medication after the last visit ? Yes. General consequences Is this the end of the development of S18886 ? Will the other trials with S18886 be stopped as well ? Yes; however there is no ongoing trial with patients. Will Servier develop S18886 in other indications ? No (patent). Is there a second follower for S18886 in the pipeline? What is the impact of this decision on Servier (R&D) as a company ? It is a risk inherent to the development of any new drug, and thus was taken into account. Other projects are ongoing and new molecules will arrive. What will happen with all the people working on this trial ? The PERFORM study must be closed in a proper fashion. Full results will be published. Thus, people working on this trial will be involved until finalisation (more or less next summer), and then will participate in other projects Communication Will the results of the trial be published ? Where and when ? Not yet decided. Will there be a press release on this topic ? No. Will there be a national meeting ? Can we still proceed with the planned investigator’s meeting ? Should we adapt the agenda ? No, except for local reasons to be discussed case by case. Data Monitoring Committee Is an advice of the DMC always binding ? No. As stated in the protocol section 8.5, if safety concerns are detected at any time during the study, or superiority/inferiority as well as futility rules are meet during the planned formal analyses, the DMC could recommend an early termination of the trial to the Executive Committee who will take the final decision in collaboration with the Sponsor. Who are the members of the DMC ? RoleTitle. Initial Forename. Name. SpecialityChairmanProf. D. JULIAN, Cardiology (GBR)MemberProf. C. FIESCHI, Neurology (ITA)MemberProf. G. BOYSEN, Neurology (DNK) MemberProf. S. POCOCK, Statistics (GBR)MemberProf. J. CONARD, Haematology (FRA) What is the exact role of the DMC ? The DMC is independent from the Sponsor. The DMC has access to the randomisation code and the Critical Events Committee validations. At any time if necessary, the Committee may ask for any supplementary information. The DMC makes appropriate recommendations to the Executive Committee Chairman concerning the conduct of the study: continuation, amendment, suspension. The DMC is free to perform any analyses without informing the Sponsor, as they are an independent committee How are they organised ? See protocol amended version section 12.3.3. What kind of analyses do they perform ? At which timepoints ? Did they conclude on the basis of both the non-inferiority and superiority approach ? Does this implicate that S18886 was not even expected to be non-inferior to aspirin ? This cannot be excluded but the chance that S 18886 will be non-inferior to aspirin is very low, and even though, in these conditions, such finding would not be clinically relevant. How do they communicate with the sponsor ? Through the Executive Committee by giving a written recommendation. Have they written a report about their findings which can be used for EC/CA information ? The written recommendation is the only document provided by the DMC; it will be attached to the information sent to EC/CA   Statistical aspects On which data was the analysis based ? Data until 07/09/09. What was the mean patient follow-up at the time of analysis ? 2.1-year mean follow-up. How many primary end points were analyzed ? 1863. Did the analysis only include adjudicated primary end points ? No, all primary endpoints (out of them 67% were adjudicated). What are the thresholds for futility ? Are they described in international guidelines ? Described in the DMC charter, document restricted for the use of DMC members. They are not described in international guidelines: How are they calculated ? Described in the DMC charter, document restricted for the use of DMC members. Do we have information about the effect of the product on the secondary endpoints ? Was the Sponsor already alerted about futility at the previous analysis ? No and the first recommendation from the DMC for stopping for futility was given on 12 October 2009 to the Executive Committee. How low is the chance to demonstrate superiority if we would have continued until the end ? No chance at all. Why a second interim analysis was performed as it was not foreseen? The DMC is free to perform any analyses that they want without informing the Sponsor, as they are an independent committee. Scientific questions Do you have an idea about the underlying reason for this result ? Not yet. Data will be analysed carefully at the end of the study to try to understand. Are there indications that the TP-receptor pathway is not a good therapeutic target ? Could concomitant treatments such as dypiridamole, statins and ACE-inhibitors have played a role ? The role of concomitant treatments cannot be excluded at this step. Data will be analysed carefully at the end of the study to try to understand.