How much can we adapt? An EORTC perspective Saskia Litière EORTC - Biostatistician.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Patient Selection Markers in Drug Development Programs
Advertisements

FDA/Industry Workshop September, 19, 2003 Johnson & Johnson Pharmaceutical Research and Development L.L.C. 1 Uses and Abuses of (Adaptive) Randomization:
Mentor: Dr. Kathryn Chaloner Iowa Summer Institute in Biostatistics
Phase II/III Design: Case Study
Breakout Session 4: Personalized Medicine and Subgroup Selection Christopher Jennison, University of Bath Robert A. Beckman, Daiichi Sankyo Pharmaceutical.
Data Monitoring Models and Adaptive Designs: Some Regulatory Experiences Sue-Jane Wang, Ph.D. Associate Director for Adaptive Design and Pharmacogenomics,
Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices | The Farm is a Federal Institute within the portfolio of the Federal Ministry of Health (Germany) How.
Statistical Analysis for Two-stage Seamless Design with Different Study Endpoints Shein-Chung Chow, Duke U, Durham, NC, USA Qingshu Lu, U of Science and.
Statistical Issues in Incorporating and Testing Biomarkers in Phase III Clinical Trials FDA/Industry Workshop; September 29, 2006 Daniel Sargent, PhD Sumithra.
Targeted (Enrichment) Design. Prospective Co-Development of Drugs and Companion Diagnostics 1. Develop a completely specified genomic classifier of the.
A pooled analysis of the final results of the two randomized phase II studies comparing Gemcitabine (G) vs Gemcitabine + Docetaxel (G+D) in patients (pts)
RELATIVE RISK ESTIMATION IN RANDOMISED CONTROLLED TRIALS: A COMPARISON OF METHODS FOR INDEPENDENT OBSERVATIONS Lisa N Yelland, Amy B Salter, Philip Ryan.
Sample size optimization in BA and BE trials using a Bayesian decision theoretic framework Paul Meyvisch – An Vandebosch BAYES London 13 June 2014.
Impact of Dose Selection Strategies on the Probability of Success in the Phase III Zoran Antonijevic Senior Director Strategic Development, Biostatistics.
Bureau of Gastroenterology, Infection
BS704 Class 7 Hypothesis Testing Procedures
Large Phase 1 Studies with Expansion Cohorts: Clinical, Ethical, Regulatory and Patient Perspectives Accelerating Anticancer Agent Development and Validation.
1Carl-Fredrik Burman, 11 Nov 2008 RSS / MRC / NIHR HTA Futility Meeting Futility stopping Carl-Fredrik Burman, PhD Statistical Science Director AstraZeneca.
By Dr. Ahmed Mostafa Assist. Prof. of anesthesia & I.C.U. Evidence-based medicine.
Phase II Design Strategies Sally Hunsberger Ovarian Cancer Clinical Trials Planning Meeting May 29, 2009.
Re-Examination of the Design of Early Clinical Trials for Molecularly Targeted Drugs Richard Simon, D.Sc. National Cancer Institute linus.nci.nih.gov/brb.
Adaptive Designs for Clinical Trials
RANDOMIZED CLINICAL TRIALS. What is a randomized clinical trial?  Scientific investigations: examine and evaluate the safety and efficacy of new drugs.
(a.k.a. Phase I trials) Dose Finding Studies. Dose Finding  Dose finding trials: broad class of early development trial designs whose purpose is to find.
Prospective Subset Analysis in Therapeutic Vaccine Studies Richard Simon, D.Sc. Chief, Biometric Research Branch National Cancer Institute
CME Disclosure Statement The North Shore LIJ Health System adheres to the ACCME's new Standards for Commercial Support. Any individuals in a position.
BIOE 301 Lecture Seventeen. Guest Speaker Jay Brollier World Camp Malawi.
Adaptive designs as enabler for personalized medicine
CI - 1 Cure Rate Models and Adjuvant Trial Design for ECOG Melanoma Studies in the Past, Present, and Future Joseph Ibrahim, PhD Harvard School of Public.
Background to Adaptive Design Nigel Stallard Professor of Medical Statistics Director of Health Sciences Research Institute Warwick Medical School
Optimal cost-effective Go-No Go decisions Cong Chen*, Ph.D. Robert A. Beckman, M.D. *Director, Merck & Co., Inc. EFSPI, Basel, June 2010.
Result of Interim Analysis of Overall Survival in the GCIG ICON7 Phase III Randomized Trial of Bevacizumab in Women with Newly Diagnosed Ovarian Cancer.
European Statistical meeting on Oncology Thursday 24 th, June 2010 Introduction - Challenges in development in Oncology H.U. Burger, Hoffmann-La Roche.
Adaptive randomization
Efficient Designs for Phase II and Phase III Trials Jim Paul CRUK Clinical Trials Unit Glasgow.
Outcome of chemotherapy in synovial sarcoma (sys) patients (pts): review of 15 clinical trials from EORTCc involving advanced sys compared to other Soft.
Adaptive Designs for Using Predictive Biomarkers in Phase III Clinical Trials Richard Simon, D.Sc. Chief, Biometric Research Branch National Cancer Institute.
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.
SARC 005: Adjuvant treatment of high risk uterine LMS with gemcitabine/docetaxel followed by doxorubicin: a phase II multi- center trial PI: Martee L.
Bayesian Approach For Clinical Trials Mark Chang, Ph.D. Executive Director Biostatistics and Data management AMAG Pharmaceuticals Inc.
Time to Secondary Resistance (TSR) After Interruption of Imatinib: Updated Results of the Prospective French Sarcoma Group Randomized Phase III Trial on.
Biostatistics Case Studies 2006 Peter D. Christenson Biostatistician Session 3: An Alternative to Last-Observation-Carried-Forward:
1 BLA Sipuleucel-T (APC-8015) FDA Statistical Review and Findings Bo-Guang Zhen, PhD Statistical Reviewer, OBE, CBER March 29, 2007 Cellular, Tissue.
12 th Annual CTOS Meeting 2006 AP23573 Induced Long-term Stability in 2 Patients with Desmoplastic Small Round Cell Tumor (#561) Scott Schuetze, Warren.
European Patients’ Academy on Therapeutic Innovation Principles of New Trial Designs.
Characteristics of a Scientific Model A theory or model helps us to interpret or explain the unknown in terms of the known. It correlates many seemingly.
EORTC OSN/CTOS11 Safety of Caelyx combined with ifosfamide in previously untreated adult patients with advanced or metastatic soft tissue sarcomas. Final.
Phase II Trial of R-CHOP plus Bortezomib Induction Therapy Followed by Bortezomib Maintenance for Previously Untreated Mantle Cell Lymphoma: SWOG 0601.
Frank Bretz (Novartis) U Penn – April 13, 2016 Acknowledgment: Willi Maurer, Paul Gallo (Novartis) Adaptive Designs: The Swiss Army Knife Among Clinical.
Adaptive trial designs in HIV vaccine clinical trials Morenike Ukpong Obafemi Awolowo University Ile-Ife, Nigeria.
Drug Development at CINJ Evolving challenges. Phase 1 Studies at CINJ Early drug trials– Fits easily in scope for single or limited number of institutions.
Bayesian-based decision making in early oncology clinical trials
Statistical Approaches to Support Device Innovation- FDA View
Rui (Sammi) Tang Biostatistics Associate Director, Vertex
Strategies for Implementing Flexible Clinical Trials Jerald S. Schindler, Dr.P.H. Cytel Pharmaceutical Research Services 2006 FDA/Industry Statistics Workshop.
Data Monitoring Committees: Current Issues and Challenges Some Discussion Points Jim Neaton University of Minnesota.
Balancing the practical implications of adaptive designs with the statistical benefits Mahesh Parmar MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL.
Dose-finding designs incorporating toxicity data from multiple treatment cycles and continuous efficacy outcome Sumithra J. Mandrekar Mayo Clinic Invited.
Barrios C et al. SABCS 2009;Abstract 46.
Aiying Chen, Scott Patterson, Fabrice Bailleux and Ehab Bassily
Data Monitoring committees and adaptive decision-making
Optimal Basket Designs for Efficacy Screening with Cherry-Picking
The 3rd Stat4Onc Annual Symposium
Hui Quan, Yi Xu, Yixin Chen, Lei Gao and Xun Chen Sanofi June 28, 2019
FAST Statistical Considerations on Early-to-Late Transition of Oncology Projects Cong Chen, PhD Executive Director and Head of Early Oncology Statistics.
Quantitative Decision Making (QDM) in Phase I/II studies
David Manner JSM Presentation July 29, 2019
Quantitative Decision Making (QDM) in Phase I/II studies
Oncology Biostatistics
Presentation transcript:

How much can we adapt? An EORTC perspective Saskia Litière EORTC - Biostatistician

I have no conflicts of interest 2

Adaptive designs What? Why? The challenges Examples  Currently part of EORTC portfolio  Currently not (yet) part of EORTC portfolio Take home messages Outline 3

“… a study that includes a prospectively planned opportunity for modification of one or more specified aspects of the study design and hypotheses based on analysis of data (usually interim data) from subjects in the study. “ What is an adaptive design? 4

They aim to make efficient use of patient and financial resources Allow for real-time learning during the course of a trial Relatively flexible: modifications possible in the course of trial which make the approach more robust to failure The drug development process is streamlined and optimized Why use adaptive designs? 5

To control the operating characteristics To control the bias due to the adaptation  Statistical  Operational To guarantee that the results can be interpreted and explained! The challenges 6

Early stopping for futility and/or efficacy Drop treatment arm(s) – also known as pick the winner designs Biomarker adaptive designs Sample size re-estimation Adaptive randomization… To name but a few … Several possible approaches 7 Well-known Less understood

Most of them come down to 8 Learn Confirm One trial Change H 0 ? Change design parameters?

A few examples 9

EORTC in first line treatment of advanced, high grade STS 10 R Doxorubicin + Ifosfamide Interim 1: PFS? Group sequential design Interim 2: OS? Final: OS?

TRUSTS (EORTC 62091) in advanced or metastatic STS 11 R Trabectedin 1.5 mg/m 2 24-h Doxorubicin 75 mg/m 2 Doxo 75 mg/m2 T 3-h or 24-h Select the best PFS Phase IIb 3 x 40 pts Phase III 2 x 110 pts Trabectedin 1.3 mg/m 2 3-h PFS? Seamless phase II/III design

–Both steps are conducted independently and the results of both steps are combined in the end in an overall test result –Shortens time and patient exposure –Relatively flexible –Efficient use of patient resources –Complex design: statistics are difficult to explain –Gap in accrual between phase II and phase III –Logistically challenging –Difficult in studies with long-term endpoints »Unless in combination with a short-term endpoint for the phase II part … another long and complex story on type I error and correlation 12 TRUSTS (EORTC 62091) in advanced or metastatic STS

13 Cytel Webinar for East®SurvAdapt, October 28, sided  5% Power = 90% HR = sided  5% Power = 90% HR = 0.7 Sample size re-estimation

May increase the risk of running an enlarged negative trial Possibility of second guessing  A resampling decision can be easily interpreted as “the treatment is not as efficient as expected” → Operational bias? Accrual? → May require extensive (expensive) logistics Protection of study integrity is essential! Sample size re-estimation 14

Battle Trial – Adaptive randomization Lee et al. Zhou et al. CT 2008

Prior probability of each treatment success given marker 8-week outcome observed Probabilities of treatment success updated based on observed results Maximizes the chance that the patient receives the treatment that is most effective for him/her Battle Trial – Adaptive randomization Randomize using the weights given by prior prob

Sample size? Requires fast dataflow – logistically demanding especially in large multicenter trials Does not work for long-term endpoint. Difficult to interpret results beyond estimation  Comparisons?  Precision? Recruitment patterns can change during the course of the trial because of deduced knowledge of randomization probabilities 17 Adaptive randomization

Simulations suggest very similar operational characteristics may be achieved if applying classical 2-stage designs with stopping rules  Korn and Freidlin, JCO 2011  Yuan and Yin, JCO 2011 Example of such an alternative: CREATE (EORTC 90101)  A Simon 2-stage design is being used to assess the activity of Crizotinib in each of 6 cohorts of patients (ALK/MET+) 18 Adaptive randomization

The STBSG EORTC is more adaptive than you may have thought There are challenging times ahead, both for clinicians as well as statisticians  Flexible design strategies  More efficient use of resources While the sky seems to be the limit, experience teaches us to be wary and critical of solutions presented as ‘miracles’. Conclusion 19

Stats colleagues at the EORTC, specifically Acknowledgment 20 Laurence Collette Jan Bogaerts Murielle Mauer