Pompe Disease Evidence Evaluation Michael Watson, PhD, on behalf of Piero Rinaldo, MD, PhD, and the Decision-Making Workgroup October 1, 2008.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
SCID Review Discussion. Decision Matrix Key Questions 1.This is the overarching question for the evidence review: Is there direct evidence that screening.
Advertisements

Susan Boynton, VP, Global Regulatory Affairs, Shire
Safety and Extrapolation Steven Hirschfeld, MD PhD Office of Cellular, Tissue and Gene Therapy Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research FDA.
Clinical Trial Designs for the Evaluation of Prognostic & Predictive Classifiers Richard Simon, D.Sc. Chief, Biometric Research Branch National Cancer.
Critically Evaluating the Evidence: diagnosis, prognosis, and screening Elizabeth Crabtree, MPH, PhD (c) Director of Evidence-Based Practice, Quality Management.
Decision Criteria and Process Advisory Committee on Heritable Disorders in Newborns and Children February 26-27, 2009.
1 Case-Control Study Design Two groups are selected, one of people with the disease (cases), and the other of people with the same general characteristics.
Estimation of Sample Size
ECG screening in asymptomatic children Delith Garrick.
Nomination and Prioritization Reports: MPS I and Pompe Disease Nancy S. Green, MD Associate Dean for Clinical Research Operations Associate Professor of.
Is Nucleic Acid Testing for Organ Donors the ‘Right’ Choice? Reference: Humara A, Morrisb M, Blumbergc R, et al. Nucleic acid testing (NAT) of organ donors:
Hyperbilirubinemia: Discussion Alexis Thompson, MD Catherine Wicklund, MS, CGC.
1.A 33 year old female patient admitted to the ICU with confirmed pulmonary embolism. It was noted that she had elevated serum troponin level. Does this.
Vanderbilt Sports Medicine Chapter 4: Prognosis Presented by: Laurie Huston and Kurt Spindler Evidence-Based Medicine How to Practice and Teach EBM.
Statistics for Health Care
Sample Size Determination
Chronic diseases 1.Chronic diseases have long and variable preclinical phases. 2.The preclinical phase is that portion of the disease natural history during.
Thoughts on Biomarker Discovery and Validation Karla Ballman, Ph.D. Division of Biostatistics October 29, 2007.
Screening and Early Detection Epidemiological Basis for Disease Control – Fall 2001 Joel L. Weissfeld, M.D. M.P.H.
Evidence Evaluation & Methods Workgroup: Developing a Decision Analysis Model Lisa A. Prosser, PhD, MS September 23, 2011.
RESULTSINTRODUCTION Accuracy of Screening Tests for Autism Spectrum Disorder in Primary Care Settings Marjolaine M. Limbos 1, PhD & David P. Joyce 2, MD,
A Review of the Committee Nomination and Review Process Nancy S. Green, MD Associate Dean for Clinical Research Operations Associate Professor of Clinical.
Power and Sample Size Determination Anwar Ahmad. Learning Objectives Provide examples demonstrating how the margin of error, effect size and variability.
Statistics for Health Care Biostatistics. Phases of a Full Clinical Trial Phase I – the trial takes place after the development of a therapy and is designed.
EDRN Approaches to Biomarker Validation DMCC Statisticians Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center Margaret Pepe Ziding Feng, Mark Thornquist, Yingye Zheng,
SCREENING Asst. Prof. Sumattna Glangkarn RN, MSc. (Epidemiology), PhD (Nursing studies)
Reliability of Screening Tests RELIABILITY: The extent to which the screening test will produce the same or very similar results each time it is administered.
Vanderbilt Sports Medicine How to practice and teach EBM Chapter 3 May 3, 2006.
Retinopathy of Prematurity: A Neglected Public Health Issue Krishnendu Sarkar Professor Regional Institute of Ophthalmology Kolkata.
Condition Review Process Report - Update Alex R. Kemper, MD, MPH, MS May 18, 2012.
Evidence Review Group: Past to Present James M. Perrin, MD Professor of Pediatrics, Harvard Medical School MGH Center for Child and Adolescent Health Policy.
CAT 3 Harm, Causation Maribeth Chitkara, MD Rachel Boykan, MD.
Recommendation to ACHDNC for Newborn Screening for X-linked Adrenoleukodystrophy Fred Lorey, Ph.D. Don Bailey, Ph.D. Liaisons to the Condition Review Workgroup.
Screening Puja Myles
1 Lecture 6: Descriptive follow-up studies Natural history of disease and prognosis Survival analysis: Kaplan-Meier survival curves Cox proportional hazards.
Screening of diseases Dr Zhian S Ramzi Screening 1 Dr. Zhian S Ramzi.
Principles of Screening
Screening and its Useful Tools Thomas Songer, PhD Basic Epidemiology South Asian Cardiovascular Research Methodology Workshop.
I have no relevant financial relationships with the manufacturers of any commercial products and/or provider of commercial services discussed in this CME.
Fall 2002Biostat Statistical Inference - Proportions One sample Confidence intervals Hypothesis tests Two Sample Confidence intervals Hypothesis.
Recommendation Methods Advisory Committee on Heritable Disorders and Genetic Diseases of Newborns and Children Ned Calonge, M.D., M.P.H.
1 Study Design Issues and Considerations in HUS Trials Yan Wang, Ph.D. Statistical Reviewer Division of Biometrics IV OB/OTS/CDER/FDA April 12, 2007.
Organization of statistical research. The role of Biostatisticians Biostatisticians play essential roles in designing studies, analyzing data and.
Screening.  “...the identification of unrecognized disease or defect by the application of tests, examinations or other procedures...”  “...sort out.
10 May Understanding diagnostic tests Evan Sergeant AusVet Animal Health Services.
EVALUATING u After retrieving the literature, you have to evaluate or critically appraise the evidence for its validity and applicability to your patient.
BIOSTATISTICS Lecture 2. The role of Biostatisticians Biostatisticians play essential roles in designing studies, analyzing data and creating methods.
Screening of genital cancers Evidence Based Presented by Dr\ Heba Nour.
United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service Overview of Trim Sampling Compliance Guidelines and Discussion Daniel Engeljohn,
The US Preventive Services Task Force: Potential Impact on Medicare Coverage Ned Calonge, MD, MPH Chair, USPSTF.
SCREENING FOR DISEASE. Learning Objectives Definition of screening; Principles of Screening.
Appendix 2 Comparison of screening from age 20 and age 25 Table of harms and benefits.
A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Maternal Genotyping to Guide Treatment in Postnatal Patients.
Biostatistics Board Review Parul Chaudhri, DO Family Medicine Faculty Development Fellow, UPMC St Margaret March 5, 2016.
© 2010 Jones and Bartlett Publishers, LLC. Chapter 12 Clinical Epidemiology.
DR.FATIMA ALKHALEDY M.B.Ch.B;F.I.C.M.S/C.M
Cancer prevention and early detection
Advance Care Planning in dementia Dr Karen Harrison Dening Head of Research & Evaluation Dementia UK GSF 2016.
Some epidemiological principles and methods
The Importance of Adequately Powered Studies
How many study subjects are required ? (Estimation of Sample size) By Dr.Shaik Shaffi Ahamed Associate Professor Dept. of Family & Community Medicine.
Class session 7 Screening, validity, reliability
AXIS critical Appraisal of cross sectional Studies
Critical Reading of Clinical Study Results
ACIP Feb , 2007 Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS) Among Recipients of Meningococcal Conjugate Vaccine (MCV4,Menactra®) Update Oct Jan Robert.
How do we delay disease progress once it has started?
Diagnosis II Dr. Brent E. Faught, Ph.D. Assistant Professor
Review – First Exam Chapters 1 through 5
Evidence Based Diagnosis
Presentation transcript:

Pompe Disease Evidence Evaluation Michael Watson, PhD, on behalf of Piero Rinaldo, MD, PhD, and the Decision-Making Workgroup October 1, 2008

Key Question 1 Is there direct evidence that screening for Pompe disease at birth leads to improved health outcomes? –No studies of the overarching question

Key Question 2 What is known about the condition? – broken down as follows: –Is the condition well-defined and important? –What is the incidence of the condition in the US? –What is the spectrum of disease for the condition? –What is the natural history of the condition, including the impact of recognition and treatment?

Key Question 2 Evidence is adequate –Infantile Pompe is well-defined, and classic vs. non- classic does not interfere with the importance of the condition nor raise many concerns about the spectrum of disease –Late-onset raises issues, and the body of evidence regarding detection and treatment seems less robust –Variation in prevalence with wide confidence intervals, as is expected with rare conditions –The largest prevalence studies are not in the US

Key Question 3 Is there a test for the condition with sufficient analytic utility and validity? –Gap that needs to be filled –Variation in how screening is done (e.g., immunofluorescense, MS/MS, immuno capture) –Only one type of test has been tested prospectively in a large-scale population study

Key Question 4 Does the test accurately and reliably detect the condition and clinical disease? –Evidence is adequate that available tests are able to discriminate between those with and without the condition, but at the cost of a high false-positive rate. In the Taiwan study, nearly all (97%) of cases who tested abnormal twice had a false positive outcome –There is some question about separating out late- onset disease and related phenotype. The data supporting early detection and early treatment of late- onset disease is insufficient

132,538 Newborns tested 121 Newborns recalled 1,101 Newborns retested (2 nd sample) 4 True positives (no false negatives) Newborn Screening for Pompe Disease Pilot Study in Taiwan

A FPR 0.83% in a Real Life Scenario State Illinois Indiana Kentucky Michigan Minnesota Ohio Wisconsin Births/ Year 177,417 87,942 54, ,585 70, ,481 69,014 FP/WEEK 0.83% 0.4% FPR PPV

Key Question 5 Are their available treatments for the condition that improve important health outcomes? – broken down as follows: –Does treatment of the condition detected through NBS improve health outcomes when compared with waiting until clinical detection? –Are there subsets of affected children more likely to benefit from treatment that can be identified through testing or clinical findings? –Are the treatments for affected children standardized, widely available, and, if appropriate, FDA approved?

Key Question 5 Adequate evidence that rhGAA improves important health outcomes based on a sample of 18 affected infants Evidence of benefit is specific to infantile-onset Pompe disease compared to natural history, and lasts at least 52 weeks. No long-term health outcomes beyond 52 weeks of treatment or 18 months of age Small body of evidence suggesting that CRIM- cases will not respond or not respond as well to rhGAA. However, it is insufficient to conclude that cases should not be treated.

Key Question 5 No description in the Evidence Review about how these 18 cases were detected. After conferring with the research team, only 2 cases were detected by screening at birth in families where there were other affected children. The other 16 were detected clinically based after a respiratory or cardiac adverse event

Key Question 5 Treatment started prior to 27 weeks of life is effective Gaps –Outcomes of treatment prior to 27 weeks of life –Age at which treatment benefit decreases –The proportion of cases of infantile Pompe disease that could be detected clinically vs. only through screening

Key Question 5 The evidence supporting early treatment of late-onset Pompe disease detected through screening is inadequate

Key Questions 6 and 7 Are there harms or risks identified for the identification and/or treatment of affected children? –No studies reporting harms of screening, including anxiety associated with the need for second screens or diagnostic testing –Diagnostic testing for screen-positive infants seems to carry little risk of harm –Harms of treatment involve immune reactions to rhGAA. These harms relative to the benefits are small.

Key Question 8 What is the estimated cost-effectiveness of testing? –No studies or published models –The magnitude of net benefit (benefit-harms) of treatment, at least up to 18-months is significant for infantile Pompe disease

Overall Adequacy of Evidence If one feels that the lack of evidence regarding how newborn screening might better translate to treatment initiation prior to 27 weeks of life is a critical gap, the evidence, even for infantile Pompe, would be assessed as inadequate. If not, then one could conclude there is adequate evidence. This assumes that screening and diagnosis will indeed discriminate between infantile and late onset Pompe.

Certainty of net benefit Again, certainty (sufficient vs. insufficient) here depends on the level of confidence that treatment benefits require screening for timely case detection and that clinical detection leads to much less benefit in terms of health outcome is important.

Contextual issues While the evidence of follow up for treatment is short, treatment translates to survival and ventilator independence. This is a compelling potential net benefit.

Summary Based on what is presented in the report of the ERW, there are significant concerns with –testing specificity –the comparative effectiveness of alternative testing algorithms (repeat specimen vs. 2nd tier tests) –the potential applicability of prognostic tools.

Summary The dramatic effectiveness of available treatment in infantile Pompe cases has been noted. However, better evidence is needed regarding –the ability for screening to distinguish between infantile and late onset disease –the efficacy of treatment in either pre- symptomatic or symptomatic cases