Evaluation of Live Phase Results from Carcinogenicity Studies Wherly Hoffman, Ph.D. Statistics and Information Sciences Lilly Research Laboratories.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Issues and Experience in Analyzing Transgenic Mouse Carcinogenicity Studies: An Industry Perspective Ronald Menton Wyeth Research 2005 FDA/Industry Statistics.
Advertisements

Gatekeeping Testing Strategies in Clinical Trials Alex Dmitrienko, Ph.D. Eli Lilly and Company FDA/Industry Statistics Workshop September 2004.
The Application of Propensity Score Analysis to Non-randomized Medical Device Clinical Studies: A Regulatory Perspective Lilly Yue, Ph.D.* CDRH, FDA,
Industry Issues: Dataset Preparation for Time to Event Analysis Davis Gates Schering Plough Research Institute.
1 Propensity Scores Methodology for Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) Analysis. Marina Kondratovich, Ph.D. U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Center.
Incorporating Historical Control Data when Comparing Tumor Incidence Rates in Rodent Cancer Bioassay Shyamal D. Peddada Biostatistics Branch National Inst.
Estimates of Survival and Mortality from Successive, Cross-Sectional Surveys David W. Smith, Ph.D., M.P.H. Consultant Stephanie L. McFall, Ph.D. Institute.
Analgesic ACM 7/29/021 Time-Specific Measurements vs. Time-Weighted Average for Pain in Chronic and Acute Analgesia Trials Laura Lu, Ph.D Office of Biostatistics,
Robert T. O’Neill, Ph.D. Director, Office of Biostatistics CDER, FDA
Regulatory Considerations for the Safety Assessment of Live Biotherapeutic Products in Clinical Trials Cara Fiore, Ph D US Food and Drug Administration.
Brian A. Harris-Kojetin, Ph.D. Statistical and Science Policy
Regulatory Toxicology James Swenberg, D.V.M., Ph.D.
Response Optimization in Oncology In Vivo Studies: a Multiobjective Modeling Approach Maksim Pashkevich, PhD (Early Phase Oncology Statistics) Joint work.
Guidelines for Carcinogen Risk Assessment and Supplemental Guidance for Assessing Cancer Risks from Early-Life Exposures March 29, 2005 Hugh A. Barton,
1 An Overview of Multiple Testing Procedures for Categorical Data Joe Heyse IMPACT Conference November 20, 2014.
CONFERENCE ON “ FOOD ADDITIVES : SAFETY IN USE AND CONSUMER CONCERNS“ JOMO KENYATTA UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURE AND TECHNOLOGY NAIROBI, 24 JUNE 2014.
1 Pharmacology/Toxicology information to submit an IND for an anticancer drug.
1 Statistical and Practical Aspects of a Non-Stop Drug Development Strategy Karen L. Kesler and Ronald W. Helms Rho, Inc. Contact:
Food Safety Export Assurance System Requirements for Dairy Products Confidential to Fonterra Co-operative Group September 2014 Malcolm Bailey – Fonterra.
Sample size optimization in BA and BE trials using a Bayesian decision theoretic framework Paul Meyvisch – An Vandebosch BAYES London 13 June 2014.
Age-Related Differences in Susceptibility to Carcinogenesis—Toward a Quantitative Analysis of Empirical Data Researchers: Dale Hattis, Principal Investigator.
Pharmaceutical Development and Review Process Rev. 10/21/2014 APGO Interaction with Industry: A Medical Student Guide.
+ Drug Development and Review Process. + Objectives Learn the processes involved in drug discovery and development Define the phases involved in FDA drug.
Effectiveness Evaluation for Therapeutic Drugs for Non-Food Animals
Adaptive Designs for Clinical Trials
Food and Drug Administration Preclinical safety data for “first in human” (FIH) clinical trials in healthy volunteer subjects Oncology Drug Advisory Committee.
CDER IND/NDA Reviews Guidance, The Common Technical Document and Good Review Practice John K. Leighton, Ph.D., DABT CDER/FDA.
June 16-19, USEPA Cancer Guidelines: Mode of Carcinogenic Action 1 ICABR – Impacts of the Bioeconomy on Agricultural Sustainability, the Environment.
Good Clinical Practice GCP
Application of Toxicology Databases in Drug Development (Estimating potential toxicity) Joseph F. Contrera, Ph.D. Director, Regulatory Research and Analysis.
Lecture 8 Objective 20. Describe the elements of design of observational studies: case reports/series.
FDA Tree Nut Risk Assessment and Human Salmonellosis
1 Data from Studies in One Indication Supporting Studies in a Different Indication March 5, 2003 Anti Infective Drugs Advisory Committee Meeting Edward.
Nonclinical Perspective on Initiating Phase 1 Studies for Small Molecular Weight Compounds John K. Leighton, PH.D., DABT Supervisory Pharmacologist Division.
Biomedical Research Objective 2 Biomedical Research Methods.
False Discovery Rates for Discrete Data Joseph F. Heyse Merck Research Laboratories Graybill Conference June 13, 2008.
Implications of the Current State of Scientific Knowledge David W K Acheson, M.D. Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
1 OTC-TFM Monograph: Statistical Issues of Study Design and Analyses Thamban Valappil, Ph.D. Mathematical Statistician OPSS/OB/DBIII Nonprescription Drugs.
1 Statistics in Drug Development Mark Rothmann, Ph. D.* Division of Biometrics I Food and Drug Administration * The views expressed here are those of the.
Proposal for End-of-Phase 2A (EOP2A) Meetings Advisory Committee for Pharmaceutical Sciences Clinical Pharmacology Subcommittee November 17-18, 2003 Lawrence.
1 THE ROLE OF COVARIATES IN CLINICAL TRIALS ANALYSES Ralph B. D’Agostino, Sr., PhD Boston University FDA ODAC March 13, 2006.
MAIN TOXICITY TESTING. TESTING STRATEGIES A number of different types of data are used in order to establish the safety of chemical substances for use.
PhRMA Perspective on FDA Final Report FDA Advisory Committee on Pharmaceutical Sciences October 20, 2004 G.P. Migliaccio, Pfizer Inc.
Clinical Pharmacology Subcommittee of the Advisory Committee for Pharmaceutical Science Meeting April Quantitative risk analysis using exposure-response.
Privacy Symposium / HIPAA Summit
Mixed ANOVA Models combining between and within. Mixed ANOVA models We have examined One-way and Factorial designs that use: We have examined One-way.
Chapter 15.3 Risk Assessment 2002 WHO report: “Focusing on risks to health is the key to preventing disease and injury.” risk assessment—process of evaluating.
UPDATE: Nonclinical Reproductive Toxicity Information in Assessing Human Risk Joseph J. DeGeorge Ph.D. Associate Director for Pharmacology and Toxicology.
John W. Tukey’s Multiple Contributions to Statistics at Merck Joseph F. Heyse Merck Research Laboratories Third International Conference on Multiple Comparisons.
Bioequivalence Criteria Research Plan Stella G. Machado, Ph.D. Office of Biostatistics and the Replicate Design Technical Committee Advisory Committee.
Global Methadone Hydrochloride Market
Bioassay Optimization and Robustness Using Design of Experiments Methodology 2015 NBC, San Francisco June 8, 2015 Kevin Guo.
Acute Toxicity Studies Single dose - rat, mouse (5/sex/dose), dog, monkey (1/sex/dose) 14 day observation In-life observations (body wt., food consumption,
© Copyright 2004 Frost & Sullivan. All Rights Reserved. World Psychiatric Therapeutics Markets Loss of Patent Protection Challenges Market Growth Pharmaceutical.
Rigor and Transparency in Research
GCP (GOOD CLINICAL PRACTISE)
COM 295 STUDY Inspiring Minds/com295study.com
for Human Pharmaceuticals Kyung-Chul Choi D.V.M., Ph.D.
BIOASSAY OF OESTROGENS
psy 325 aid Expect Success/psy325aiddotcom
Telephone    Provider of Global Contract Research Services Accelerating Preclinical Research, Drug Discovery.
New FDA Guidance on Early Alzheimer’s Disease
BIOASSAY OF OESTROGENS
Statistical analysis (PERMANOVA) for the potential of black soldier fly larvae (BSFL) as a shrimp feed ingredient to replace partial fishmeal Bell Lin.
Development Plans: Study Design and Dose Selection
Safety Analytics Workshop – Computational Science Symposium 2019
Objective 2 Biomedical Research Methods
Use of Piecewise Weighted Log-Rank Test for Trials with Delayed Effect
Electronic Document Room Biostat Reviewer Doses, Survival
Presentation transcript:

Evaluation of Live Phase Results from Carcinogenicity Studies Wherly Hoffman, Ph.D. Statistics and Information Sciences Lilly Research Laboratories

2003 FDA/Industry Statistics Workshop Wherly Hoffman Company Confidential Copyright © 2003 Eli Lilly and Company 2 Outline

2003 FDA/Industry Statistics Workshop Wherly Hoffman Company Confidential Copyright © 2003 Eli Lilly and Company 3 Background The objectives of carcinogenicity studies are to identify a tumorigenic potential in animals and to understand the potential for such risk in humans. Federal Register, Vol 61, No. 42. March 1996 Required for most pharmaceuticals for global submissions

2003 FDA/Industry Statistics Workshop Wherly Hoffman Company Confidential Copyright © 2003 Eli Lilly and Company 4 Background Some Design factors –Duration –Species/strain –Sample size –Dose selection –Allocation of animals to dose groups …. Guidance for industry statistical aspects of the design,analysis, and interpretation of chronic rodent carcinogenicity studies of pharmaceuticals (draft guidance online) by Lin, K. K. (2001). Accessed: 2003 May 27

2003 FDA/Industry Statistics Workshop Wherly Hoffman Company Confidential Copyright © 2003 Eli Lilly and Company 5 Statistical Considerations Design –2 years –Control + 3 to 4 doses –Body weight stratification (groups) –60 animals/group/sex –Column randomization (location) Key response variables analyzed –Survival –Tumor incidence –Body weight and food consumption

2003 FDA/Industry Statistics Workshop Wherly Hoffman Company Confidential Copyright © 2003 Eli Lilly and Company 6 Growth Parameters Measured/Derived Body weight Body weight gain (current-initial) Relative daily food consumption (daily food consumption/day/avg wt)

2003 FDA/Industry Statistics Workshop Wherly Hoffman Company Confidential Copyright © 2003 Eli Lilly and Company 7 Statistical Analyses on Growth Parameters Primary Purpose: examine compound-related effects –Is there a treatment effect? monotonic or not? => Evaluation of dose-response relationship without time consideration will be illustrated prior to the repeated measures analysis –Is the treatment effect consistent across time? => Evaluate dose-response relationship with time consideration

2003 FDA/Industry Statistics Workshop Wherly Hoffman Company Confidential Copyright © 2003 Eli Lilly and Company 8 Examples of Dose-response Curves

2003 FDA/Industry Statistics Workshop Wherly Hoffman Company Confidential Copyright © 2003 Eli Lilly and Company 9 Evaluation of Dose-response Relationship Without Time Considerations Is there a monotonic dose-response relationship? Want to identify the highest no-effect dose Reference: Tukey JW, Ciminera JL, Heyse JF Testing the statistical certainty of a response to increasing doses of a drug. Biometrics 41:

2003 FDA/Industry Statistics Workshop Wherly Hoffman Company Confidential Copyright © 2003 Eli Lilly and Company 10 Sequential Trend Test with ANOVA: Hypotheses Notation: d 1, d 2,...d k - dose levels of a compound. response of the i th subject in the i th dose group Model: Y ij = i + ij ij ~ iid N(0, ), i = 1 to k, j= 1 to n i Hypotheses: Ho: i = for all i, Ha: 1 < 2 <... i... < k, at least one inequality Test for trends: test if the contrast is 0, i.e. where i may be on the log scale c i determines different types of trends

2003 FDA/Industry Statistics Workshop Wherly Hoffman Company Confidential Copyright © 2003 Eli Lilly and Company 11 Sequential Trend Test with ANOVA: Test Statistic Under the null hypothesis of no trend, the t-statistic is distributed as t(N-k). N= total # of subjects, k= # of dose levels

2003 FDA/Industry Statistics Workshop Wherly Hoffman Company Confidential Copyright © 2003 Eli Lilly and Company 12 Sequential Trend Test with ANOVA: Decision Process Start at the high dose. Is the p <.05 (= for the high dose trend? No- Stop. No monotonic trend at the high dose. Yes- Continue to the next lower dose. Test for trend at the next lower dose with 0 coefficient for the high dose.Is the trend p-value <.05? No- Stop. No monotonic trend at this dose. Yes- Continue…

2003 FDA/Industry Statistics Workshop Wherly Hoffman Company Confidential Copyright © 2003 Eli Lilly and Company 13 Sequential Trend Test with ANOVA: Illustration with Body Weight Data Trend test up to the highest dose (4th) p<0.05 Trend up to the next lower dose (3rd) p<0.05 Trend up to the next lower dose (2nd) p>0.05 Stop and conclude 2nd dose is a no effect dose level

2003 FDA/Industry Statistics Workshop Wherly Hoffman Company Confidential Copyright © 2003 Eli Lilly and Company 14 Sequential Trend Test with ANOVA: Approach to Non-monotonicity What if there is no monotonic dose-response relationship at the high dose (p>.05)? Need to look for a nonmonotonic trend in the treatment means F-test ( =.01) Dunnett's t-test comparing each treated group to control ( =.05) Reference: Dunnett CW New tables for multiple comparisons with a control. Biometrics 20:

2003 FDA/Industry Statistics Workshop Wherly Hoffman Company Confidential Copyright © 2003 Eli Lilly and Company 15 No Perform linear trend test ( =.05) & trt F-test ( =.01) STP Yes 1-Factor ANOVA with Trend Test & Dunnetts Test 1 Perform Dunnetts t-test ( =.05) No Yes SOP STOP Was trend significant? p<.05 Was trt F-test significant? p<.01

2003 FDA/Industry Statistics Workshop Wherly Hoffman Company Confidential Copyright © 2003 Eli Lilly and Company 16 Evaluation of Dose-response Relationship With Time Considerations Is there a monotonic dose-response relationship? How is the effect changing with time? - identify the highest no-effect dose - test for a monotonic effect in treatment means - evaluate the time effect - evaluate the interaction between time and dose Same for non-monotonic effects

2003 FDA/Industry Statistics Workshop Wherly Hoffman Company Confidential Copyright © 2003 Eli Lilly and Company 17 Sequential Trend Test with One-Factor Repeated Measures Analysis: Data N animals in total, k dose levels (including control), M time intervals Test both compound and time effects Dose LevelAnimal Time 1Time 2 Time 3 …... Control 0001 x x x Control 0002 x x x... Low 1001 x x x Low 1002 x x x …... High 4001 x x x High 4002 x x x …..

2003 FDA/Industry Statistics Workshop Wherly Hoffman Company Confidential Copyright © 2003 Eli Lilly and Company 18 Sequential Trend Test with One-Factor Repeated Measures Analysis: Model Linear Mixed Effects Model Fixed: dose, time. Random: animal, error. y = X + Z + y = (y ijk ) y ijk = body weight of i th dose, j th time, k th animal = fixed effects- dose, time, dose*time, (covariates) = random effects- animal = errors N(0, G), N(0 R) and are independent

2003 FDA/Industry Statistics Workshop Wherly Hoffman Company Confidential Copyright © 2003 Eli Lilly and Company 19 Sequential Trend Test with One-Factor Repeated Measures Analysis: SAS code PROC MIXED DATA=ONE; CLASS DOSE TIME ANIMAL; MODEL Y= DOSE TIME DOSE*TIME COVARIATE/ DDFM=KNEWARDROGER; {RANDOM INT/ SUBJECT=ANIMAL(DOSE);} {{REPEATED TIME/TYPE=XXX SUBJECT=ANIMAL(DOSE);}} ESTIMATE "LINEAR TREND in DOSE AT TIME 1" DOSE DOSE*TIME ; CONTRAST ….. Note:This works on long data (transpose time). Either { } or {{ }} is included for different covariance structures.

2003 FDA/Industry Statistics Workshop Wherly Hoffman Company Confidential Copyright © 2003 Eli Lilly and Company 20 Sequential Trend Test with One-Factor Repeated Measures ANOVA: Monotonicity Look for a monotonic effect in treatment means Linear trend test on treatment means ( =.05) - at each time point if at least one of the following is significant (1) linear treatment trend by linear time trend ( =.05) (2) linear treatment trend by quadratic time trend ( =.05) (3) linear treatment trend by time ( =.01) - on means pooled across all time points otherwise

2003 FDA/Industry Statistics Workshop Wherly Hoffman Company Confidential Copyright © 2003 Eli Lilly and Company 21 Sequential Trend Test with One-Factor Repeated Measures ANOVA: non-monotonicity What if there is no monotonic dose-response relationship? Look for a nonmonotonic effect in treatment means Bonferroni adjusted t-test comparing each treated group to control ( =.05) - at each time point if treatment by time interaction F-test p<.01 - on means pooled across all time points if main treatment F-test p<.01 Reference: Miller RG, Jr Simultaneous statistical inference. 2nd ed. New York: Springer-Verlag. p

2003 FDA/Industry Statistics Workshop Wherly Hoffman Company Confidential Copyright © 2003 Eli Lilly and Company 22 No Perform Interaction Tests: LinTrt*LinTime( =.05) LinTrt*QrdTime( =.05) LinTrt*Time( =.01) Perform LinTrt ( =.05) pooled across time NoYes STO STP Yes 1-Factor Repeated Measures Yes 1 Perform Bonferroni-adjusted pair-wise t-tests Pooled across time STOP No Yes SOP No Yes STOP 1 Perform LinTrt ( =.05) at each time point Any p < Was trend significant? P<.05 STOP Perform Bonferroni-adjusted pair-wise t-tests at each time point Was Trt*Time p<.01? 1 WasTrt F-test significant? P<.01 STOP Perform Trt*Time F-test (.01) & Trt F-test(.01) pooled across time Was any trend significant? p<.05 Go To 1

2003 FDA/Industry Statistics Workshop Wherly Hoffman Company Confidential Copyright © 2003 Eli Lilly and Company 23 Rodent Growth Data Two rodent growth parameters are statistically analyzed – Interval body weight adjusted for baseline weight – Interval daily relative food consumption (Interval food consumption/day/avg wt) Body weight gains: descriptive statistics and %change relative to control (ICH, 1995)

2003 FDA/Industry Statistics Workshop Wherly Hoffman Company Confidential Copyright © 2003 Eli Lilly and Company 24 Analysis Phases Statistical Analysis Phases Growth Phase up to 3 months ( 9 time intervals) Maintenance Phase the rest ( 9 time intervals)

2003 FDA/Industry Statistics Workshop Wherly Hoffman Company Confidential Copyright © 2003 Eli Lilly and Company 25 Data Preparation Consolidate time intervals First Month: take all or weekly (t=2 to 4) Months 2-3: every 2 wks (t=4,5) Months 4-6: every 4 wks (t=3) Months 7-12: every 3 mos (t=2) Months 13-24: every 3 mos (t=4) t: number of time points

2003 FDA/Industry Statistics Workshop Wherly Hoffman Company Confidential Copyright © 2003 Eli Lilly and Company 26 Example: Mouse Body Weights

27

28

29

2003 FDA/Industry Statistics Workshop Wherly Hoffman Company Confidential Copyright © 2003 Eli Lilly and Company 30 Analysis summary Body weight – Key time intervals (interval body weight) – Include all non-missing interval data – Baseline weight as a covariate – Two analysis phases – Covariance structure (historical control/current data) – Report %change of body weight gain relative to control (ICH, 1995) Food consumption – Key time intervals (interval daily food consumption) – Relative not absolute food consumption – Include all non-missing interval data – Two analysis phases – Covariance structure (historical control/current data)

2003 FDA/Industry Statistics Workshop Wherly Hoffman Company Confidential Copyright © 2003 Eli Lilly and Company 31 General Strategy No change proposed for body weight and food consumption collection schedule Analyze key parameters: body weight and relative food consumption Identify key time points/intervals Perform appropriate/efficient statistical analyses Benefits – fewer statistical tests – fewer false positives – Succinct yet comprehensive interpretation of treatment effects

2003 FDA/Industry Statistics Workshop Wherly Hoffman Company Confidential Copyright © 2003 Eli Lilly and Company 32 Summary Perform repeated measures analysis on growth data measured across time in two analysis phases Implementation tools-one step at a time Regulatory acceptance Reference Analysis of Rodent Growth Data in Toxicology Studies by Wherly P. Hoffman, Daniel Ness, and Robert van Lier Toxicological sciences 66, (2002)

2003 FDA/Industry Statistics Workshop Wherly Hoffman Company Confidential Copyright © 2003 Eli Lilly and Company 33 Daniel NessBob van Lier Cindy LeeKathy Piroozi Karl LinRay Carroll Wendell SmithMike Dorato Gerald LongMary Jeanne Kallman Judy HoytPatrick Cocke Susan Christopher For questions Acknowledgements