Designing Phase 2 Trials Based on Program-Level Considerations: A Case Study for Neuropathic Pain

Drug Information Journal

Volumn 46, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 439-454

  Patel, Nitin ^a   Bolognese, James ^a   Chuang Stein, Christy ^b   Hewitt, David ^c   Gammaitoni, Arnold ^d   Pinheiro, Jose ^e  

^a Cytel Incorporated   (United States)

^b PFIZER INC   (United States)

^c MERCK RESEARCH LABORATORIES   (United States)

^d Nuvo Research Inc   (United States)

^e JANSSEN RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT   (United States)

Author keywords

maximum utility dose selection method; net present value; probability of success; target efficacy dose selection method

Indexed keywords

ADVERSE DRUG REACTION; ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; CLINICAL RESEARCH; CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST; DATA BASE; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM; DOSE RESPONSE; DRUG EFFICACY; DRUG TOLERABILITY; HUMAN; LOGISTIC REGRESSION ANALYSIS; MARKET; NEUROPATHIC PAIN; PAIN ASSESSMENT; PATENT; PHASE 2 CLINICAL TRIAL; PHASE 3 CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROBABILITY; RATING SCALE; SAMPLE SIZE; SIMULATION; STUDY DESIGN;

EID: 84873804894     PISSN: 00928615     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0092861512444031     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Hornberger JC,Brown BWM,Halperin J.Designing a cost-effective clinical trials.Stat Med. 1995;14:2249-2259.
2. Hornberger J,Eghtesady P.The cost-benefit of a randomized trial to a health care organization.Controlled Clinical Trials. 1998;19:198-211.
3. Chen C,Beckman RA.Optimal cost-effective designs of phase II proof of concept trials and associated go-no-go decisions.J Biopharm Stat. 2009;19:424-436.
4. O'Hagan A,Stevens JW,Campbell MJ.Assurance in clinical trial design.Pharm Stat. 2005;4:187-201.
5. Chuang-Stein C.Sample size and the probability of a successful trial.Pharm Stat. 2006;5 (4): 305-309.
6. Chuang-Stein C,Yang R.A revisit of sample size decision in confirmatory trials.Stat Biopharm Res. 2010;2:239-248.
7. Chuang-Stein C,Kirby S,French J, et al.A quantitative approach for making go/no go decisions in drug development.Drug Inf J. 2011;45:187-202.
8. Julious SA,Swank DJ.Moving statistics beyond the individual clinical trial: applying decision science to optimize a clinical development plan.Pharm Stat. 2005;4:37-46.
9. Burman CF,Grieve AP,Senn SPharmaceutical Statistics Using SAS®: A Practical Guide. Dmitrienko AChuang-Stein CD'Agostino R, ed. Cary NC: SAS Institute; 2007:385-428.
10. Antonijevic Z.Impact of dose selection strategies on the success of drug development programs.Drug Inf J. 2009;4:104-106.
11. Antonijevic Z,Pinheiro J,Fardipour P,Roger JL.Impact of dose selection strategies used in phase II on the probability of success in phase III.Stat Biopharm Res. 2010;2 (4): 469-486.
12. Pinheiro J,Sax F,Antonijevic Z, et al.Adaptive and model-based dose-ranging trials: quantitative evaluation and recommendations (with discussions and rejoinder).Stat Biopharm Res. 2010;2 (4): 435-454.
13. Kowalski KG,Ewy W,Hutmacher MM,Miller R,Krishnaswami S.Model-based drug development-a new paradigm for efficient drug development.Biopharm Rep. 2007;15 (2): 2-22.
14. Kowalski KG,Olson S,Remmers AE,Hutmacher MM.Modeling and simulation to support dose selection and clinical development of SC-75416, a selective COX-2 inhibitor for the treatment of acute and chronic pain.Clin Pharm Ther. 2008;83:857-866.
15. Patel NR,Ankolekar S.A Bayesian approach for incorporating economic factors in sample size and design for clinical trials and portfolios of drugs.Stat Med. 2007;26:4976-4988.
16. Mehta CR,Patel NR.Adaptive, group sequential and decision theoretic approaches to sample size determination.Stat Med. 2006;25:3250-3269.
17. Torrance N,Smith BH,Bennett MI,Lee AJ.The epidemiology of chronic pain of predominantly neuropathic origin. Results from a general population survey.J Pain. 2006;7 (4): 281-289.
18. Bouhassira D,Lantéri-Minet M,Attal N,Laurent B,Touboul C.Prevalence of chronic pain with neuropathic characteristics in the general population.Pain. 2008;136 (3): 380-387.
19. Hewitt DJ,Ho TW,Galer B, et al.Impact of responder definition on the enriched enrollment randomized withdrawal trial design for establishing proof of concept in neuropathic pain.Pain. 2011;152 (3): 514-521.
20. EMA Neuropathic Pain guideline. January 24, 2007. http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientific_guideline/2009/09/WC500003478.pdf. Accessed March 27, 2012.
21. Chappell AS,Ossanna MJ,Liu-Seifert H, et al.Duloxetine, a centrally acting analgesic, in the treatment of patients with osteoarthritis knee pain: a 13-week, randomized, placebo-controlled trial.Pain. 2009;146:253-260.
22. Ehrich EW,Davies GM,Watson DJ,Bolognese JA,Seidenberg BC,Bellamy N.Minimal perceptible clinical improvement with the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index questionnaire and global assessments in patients with osteoarthritis.J Rheumatol. 2000;27 (11): 2635-2641.
23. Bornkamp B,Bretz F,Dmitrienko A, et al.Innovative approaches for designing and analyzing adaptive dose-ranging trials (with discussion).J Biopharm Stat. 2007;17:965-995.
24. Dragalin V,Hsuan F,Padmanabhan SK.Adaptive designs for dose-finding studies based on sigmoid Emax model.J Biopharm Stat. 2007;17:1051-1070.
25. Tukey JW,Ciminera JL,Heyse JF.Testing the statistical certainty of a response to increasing doses of a drug.Biometrics. 1985;41:295 301.
26. Keeney RL,Raiffa HDecisions with multiple objectives: preferences and value tradeoffs. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons; 1976:.
27. Holford N,Sheiner L.Understanding the dose-effect relationship: clinical application of pharmacodynamic models.Clin Pharmacokin. 1981;6:429-453.
28. Fedorov VV,Leonov SL.Optimal design of dose response experiments: a model oriented approach.Drug Inf J. 2001;35:1373-1383.
29. MacDougall JDose Finding in Drug Development. Ting N, ed. New York, NY: Springer; 2006:127-145.
30. Dragalin V,Bornkamp B,Bretz F, et al.A simulation study to compare new adaptive dose-ranging designs.Stat Biopharm Res. 2010;2 (4): 487-512.
31. Miller F,Guilbaud O,Dette H.Optimal designs for estimating the interesting part of a dose-effect curve.J Biopharm Stat. 2007;17:1097-1115.
32. Chib S.Subjective and Objective Bayesian Statistics: Principles, Models, and Applications. 2nd ed. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons. 2003:119-171.New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons; 2003:119-171.
33. Robertson T,Wright FT,Dykstra RLOrder Restricted Statistical Inference. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons; 1988:.
34. Parmigiani G,Inoue LYTDecision Theory: Principles and Approaches. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons; 2009:.
35. Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use. CHMP Reflection Paper on Methodological Issues in Confirmatory Clinical Trials Planned with an Adaptive Design. www.ema.europa.eu/pdfs/human/ewp/245902enadopted.pdf. Adopted by CHMP on October 18, 2007. Accessed March 27, 2012.
36. Adaptive Design Clinical Trials for Drugs and Biologics. 2010, available athttp://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/UCM201790.pdf. February 2010. Accessed March 27, 2012.