The role of adaptive trial designs in drug development

Expert Review of Clinical Pharmacology

Volumn 10, Issue 7, 2017, Pages 727-736

  Curtin, François ^a,b,c   Heritier, Stephane ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GENEVA   (Switzerland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF GENEVA   (Switzerland)

^c GENEURO SA   (Switzerland)

^d MONASH UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Adaptive trial design; clinical trial; drug development phases; interim analysis; regulatory process; type I error

Indexed keywords

BIOLOGICAL MARKER; NEW DRUG;

ADAPTIVE TRIAL DESIGN; CLINICAL RESEARCH; DRUG CHOICE; DRUG DEVELOPMENT; EUROPE; EUROPEAN MEDICINES AGENCY; FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION; FUTUROLOGY; GOAL ATTAINMENT; HUMAN; KNOWLEDGE; MEASUREMENT ERROR; METHODOLOGY; MULTICENTER STUDY (TOPIC); PATIENT SELECTION; PHASE 1 CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); PHASE 2 CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); PHASE 3 CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); POPULATION RESEARCH; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PROFESSIONAL STANDARD; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); REVIEW; SAMPLE SIZE; STATISTICAL CONCEPTS; UNITED STATES; CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); DRUG DESIGN; GOVERNMENT; PROCEDURES;

CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; DRUG DESIGN; EUROPE; GOVERNMENT AGENCIES; HUMANS; RESEARCH DESIGN; UNITED STATES;

EID: 85021098083     PISSN: 17512433     EISSN: 17512441     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/17512433.2017.1321985     Document Type: Review

References (87)

1. Lou K, de Rond M., The ‘not invented here’ myth. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2006;5:451–452.
2. Hay M, Thomas DW, Craighead JL, et al. Clinical development success rates for investigational drugs. Nat Biotechnol. 2015;32:40–51.
3. Keegan KD., Biotechnology valuation. An introductory guide. Chicester:John Wiley & Sons; 2008.
4. Sheiner L. Learning vs confirming in clinical drug development? Clin Pharmacol Ther. 1997;61:275–291.
5. Orloff J, Douglas F, Pinheiro J, et al. The future of drug development:advancing clinical trial design. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2009 Dec;8(12):949–957.
6. Bretz F, Koenig F, Brannath W, et al. Tutorial in biostatistics:adaptive designs for confirmatory clinical trials. Stat Med. 2009;28:1181–1217.
7. Maca J, Dragalin V, Gallo P. Adaptive clinical trials:overview of phase III designs and challenges. Ther Innovation Regul Sci. 2014;48:31–40.
8. FDA critical path opportunities report (FDA 2006). Available from:https://www.fda.gov/downloads/ScienceResearch/SpecialTopics/CriticalPathInitiative/CriticalPathOpportunitiesReports/ucm110
9. FDA guidance for industry adaptive design clinical trials for drugs and biologics. 2010. Available from:https://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/UCM201790.pdf• Key regulatory guidance for adaptive design.
10. Elsäßer A, Regenstrom J, Vetter T, et al. Adaptive clinical trial designs for European marketing authorization:a survey of scientific advice letters from the European Medicines Agency. Trials. 2014 Oct 2;15:383.
11. Todd S, Whitehead A, Stallard N. Whitehead J Interim analyses and sequential designs in phase III studies. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2001 May;51(5):394–399.
12. Peto R, Pike MC, Armitage P, et al. Design and analysis of randomized clinical trials requiring prolonged observation of each patient:I. Introduction and design. Br J Cancer. 1976;34;585–612.
13. Pocock SJ. Group sequential methods in the design and analysis of clinical trials. Biometrika. 1977;64(2):191–199.
14. O’Brien PC, Fleming TR. A multiple testing procedure for clinical trials. Biometrics. 1979;35:549–556.
15. Lan KKG, DeMets DL. Discrete sequential boundaries for clinical trials. Biometrika. 1983;70:659–663.
16. Bauer P. Multi-stage testing with adaptive design. Biom Und Inform in Med Und Biol. 1989;20:130–148.
17. Bauer P, Köhne K. Evaluation of experiments with adaptive interim analyses. Biometrics. 1994 Dec;50(4):1029–1041.
18. Bauer P, Bretz F, Dragalin V, et al. Twenty-five years of confirmatory adaptive designs:opportunities and pitfalls. Stat Med. 2016 Feb 10; 35(3):325–347.•• Comprehensive review on adaptive methodology
19. Dmitrienko A, D’Agostino RB, Sr, Huque MF. Key multiplicity issues in clinical drug development. Stat Med. 2013 Mar 30;32(7):1079–1111. Epub 2012 Oct 9.
20. Posch M, Koenig F, Branson M, et al. Testing and estimation in flexible group sequential designs with adaptive treatment selection. Stat Med. 2005 Dec 30; 24(24):3697–3714.•• Paper introducing the combination of results across stages
21. Marcus R, Peritz E, Gabriel K. On closed testing procedures with special reference to ordered analysis of variance. Biometrika. 1976;63:655–660.
22. Burman CF, Sonesson C. Are flexible designs sound? Biometrics. 2006;62(3):664–669.
23. Berry DA. Bayesian clinical trials. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2006 Jan;5(1):27–36. Review.
24. Berry SM, Carlin BP, Lee JJ, et al. Bayesian adaptive methods for clinical trials. Boca Raton (FL):CRC Press; 2010.
25. Berry DA. The brave new world of clinical cancer research:adaptive biomarker-driven trials integrating clinical practice with clinical research. Mol Oncol. 2015;9(5):951–959.•• Paper introducing the concept of platform and basket trials
26. Park JM, Liu MC, Yee D, et al. for the I-SPY 2 investigators. Adaptive randomization of neratinib in early breast cancer. New England J Med. 2016;375(1):11–22.
27. Yuan Y, Guo B, Munsell M, et al. MIDAS:a practical Bayesian design for platform trials with molecularly targeted agents. Stat Med. 2016;35:3892–3906.
28. Royston P, Parmar MK, Qian W. Novel designs for multi-arm clinical trials with survival outcomes with an application in ovarian cancer. Stat Med. 2003;22(14):2239–2256.
29. Royston P, Bartherl FMS, Parmar MKB, et al. Designs for clinical trials with time-to-event outcomes based on stopping guidelines for lack of benefit. Trials. 2011;12:81.
30. Magirr D, Jaki T, Whitehead J. A generalized Dunnett test for multi-arm multi-stage clinical studies with treatment selection. Biometrika. 2012;99(2):494–501.
31. Wason J, Magirr D, Law M, et al. Some recommendations for multi-arm multi-stage trials. Stat Methods Med Res. 2016;25(2):716–727.
32. Ghosh P, Liu L, Senchaudhuri P, et al. Design and monitoring of multi-arm multi-stage clinical trials. Biometrics. 2017. ahead of print.
33. Crouch LA, Dodd LE, Proschan MA. Controlling the family-wise error rate in multi-arm, multi-stage trials. Clin Trials. 2017 Apr. ahead of print.
34. Le Tourneau C, Lee JJ, Siu LL. Dose escalation methods in phase I cancer clinical trials. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009 May 20;101(10):708–720.
35. O’Quigley J, Zohar S. Experimental designs for Phase I and Phase I/II dose-finding studies. Br J Cancer. 2006;94(5):609–613.
36. O’Quigley J, Pepe M, Fisher L. Continual reassessment method:a practical design for Phase I clinical trials in cancer. Biometrics. 1990;46:33–48.
37. Yin G, Yuan Y. Bayesian model averaging continual reassessment method in phase I clinical trials. J Am Stat Assoc. 2009;104:954–968.
38. Tighiouart M, Liu M, Rogatko A. Escalation with overdose control using time to toxicity for cancer phase i clinical trials. PLoS One. 2004;9(3):e93070.
39. Piantadosi S1, Liu G. Improved designs for dose escalation studies using pharmacokinetic measurements. Stat Med. 1996 Aug 15;15(15):1605–1618.
40. Hu B1, Bekele BN, Ji Y. Adaptive dose insertion in early phase clinical trials. Clin Trials. 2013 Apr;10(2):216–224.
41. Chu Y, Pan H, Yuan Y. Adaptive dose modification for phase I clinical trials. Stat Med. 2016;35(20):3497–3508.
42. Cheung YK, Chappell R. Sequential designs for phase I clinical trials with late-onset toxicities. Biometrics. 2000;56:1177–1182.
43. Jin I, Liu S, Thall P, et al. Using data augmentation to facilitate conduct of phase I/II clinical trials with delayed outcomes. J Am Stat Assoc. 2014;109:525–536.
44. Liu S, Yin G, Yuan Y. Bayesian data augmentation dose finding with continual reassessment method and delayed toxicity. Ann Appl Stat. 2013;7:2138–2156.
45. Yuan Y, Yin G. Robust EM continual reassessment method in oncology dose finding. J Am Stat Assoc. 2011;106:818–831.
46. Yuan Y, Nguyen H, Thall PF. bayesian designs for phase i-ii clinical trials. Boca Raton (FL):CRC Press; 2016.
47. Bornkamp B, Bretz F, Dmitrienko A, et al. Innovative approaches for designing and analyzing adaptive dose-ranging trials. Biopharm Stat. 2007;17(6):965–995.
48. International conference on harmonisation E4 dose-response information to support drug registration. 1994. Available from:http://www.ich.org/fileadmin/Public_Web_Site/ICH_Products/Guidelines/Efficacy/E4/Step4/E4_Guideline.pdf
49. Bretz F, Pinheiro JC, Branson M. Combining multiple comparisons and modeling techniques in dose-response studies. Biometrics. 2005 Sep;61(3):738–748.
50. European Medicines Agency. 2014 qualification opinion of MCP-Mod as an efficient statistical methodology for model-based design and analysis of Phase II dose finding studies under model uncertainty. Available from:http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Regulatory_and_procedural_guideline/2014/02/WC500161027.pdf
51. Guo B, Li Y. Bayesian designs of phase II oncology trials to select maximum effective dose assuming monotonic dose-response relationship. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2014 Jul 29;14:95.
52. Selmaj K1, Li DK, Hartung HP, et al. Siponimod for patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (BOLD):an adaptive, dose-ranging, randomized, phase 2 study. Lancet Neurol. 2013 Aug;12(8):756–767.
53. Fisch R, Jones I, Jones J, et al. Bayesian design of proof-of-concept trials. Ther Innovation Regul Sci. 2015;49(1):155–162.
54. Sverdlov O, Ryeznik Y, Wu S. Exact bayesian inference comparing binomial proportions, with application to proof-of-concept clinical trials. Innovation Regul Sci. 2015;49(1):163–174.
55. Mehta CR, Pocock SJ. Adaptive increase in sample size when interim results are promising:a practical guide with examples. Stat Med. 2011 Dec 10;30(28):3267–3284.
56. Mauer M, Collette L, Bogaerts J, et al., Adaptive designs at European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) with a focus on adaptive sample size re-estimation based on interim-effect size. Eur J Cancer. 2012 Jun; 48(9):1386–1391.
57. Zajicek JP, Hobart JC, Slade A, et al. Multiple sclerosis and extract of cannabis:results of the MUSEC trial. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2012 Nov;83(11):1125–1132.
58. Léauté-Labrèze C1, Hoeger P, Mazereeuw-Hautier J, et al. A randomized, controlled trial of oral propranolol in infantile hemangioma. N Engl J Med. 2015 Feb 19;372(8):735–746.•• Typical example of an adaptive pivotal trial
59. Heritier S, Morgan-Bouniol C, Lo SN, et al. A single pivotal adaptive trial in infants with proliferating hemangioma:rationale, design challenges, experience and recommendations. In:Sverdlov O, editor. Modern adaptive randomized clinical trials:statistical and practical aspects. Boca Raton (FL):CRC Press; 2015. p. 453–482.•• Overview of the technical and practical issues of an adaptive Phase II–III trial
60. Heritier S, Lo S, Morgan C. An adaptive confirmatory trial with interim treatment selection:practical experiences and unbalanced randomization. Stat Med. 2011;30:1541–1554.
61. Hünseler C, Balling G, Röhlig C, et al. Continuous infusion of clonidine in ventilated newborns and infants:a randomized controlled trial. Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2014 Jul;15(6):511–522.
62. Food and drug administration (FDA):guidance for industry:enrichment strategies for clinical trials to support approval of human drugs and biological products. 2012. Available from:https://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/UCM332181.pdf
63. Mehta C1, Schäfer H, Daniel H, et al. Biomarker driven population enrichment for adaptive oncology trials with time to event endpoints. Stat Med. 2014 Nov 20;33(26):4515–4531. Epub 2014 Jul 30.
64. Song JX. A two-stage patient enrichment adaptive design in phase II oncology trials. Contemp Clin Trials. 2014 Jan;37(1):148–154.
65. An MW, Mandrekar SJ, Sargent DJ. A 2-stage phase II design with direct assignment option in stage II for initial marker validation. Clin Cancer Res. 2012 Aug 15;18(16):4225–4233.
66. Zhang Y, Trippa L, Parmigiani G. Optimal Bayesian adaptive trials when treatment efficacy depends on biomarkers. Biometrics. 2016 Jun;72(2):414–421.
67. Liu S, Lee JJ. An overview of the design and conduct of the BATTLE trials. Chin Clin Oncol. 2015 Sep;4(3):33.
68. Gu X1, Chen N1, Wei C, et al. Bayesian two-stage biomarker-based adaptive design for targeted therapy development. Stat Biosci. 2016 Jun;8(1):99–128. Epub 2014 Dec 4.
69. James ND, Sydes MR, Mason MD, et al. Celecoxib plus hormone therapy versus hormone therapy alone for hormone-sensitive prostate cancer:first results from the STAMPEDE multi-arm, multi-stage, randomized controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 2012 May;13(5):549–558. Erratum in:Lancet Oncol. 2013 Jan; 14(1):e5.
70. James ND, Sydes MR, Clarke NW, et al. Addition of docetaxel, zoledronic acid, or both to first-line long-term hormone therapy in prostate cancer (STAMPEDE):survival results from an adaptive, multi-arm, multi-stage, platform randomized controlled trial. Lancet. 2016 Mar 19;387(10024):1163–1177.•• Example of a large multiarm multistage platform trial
71. Sydes MR, James ND, Mason MD, et al. Flexible trial design in practice:dropping and adding arms in STAMPEDE (MRC PR08, CRUK/06/019)-A multi-arm, multi-stage randomized controlled trial. J Clin Oncol. 2012 Feb 10;30(5_suppl):27.
72. Dimairo M, Boote J, Julious SJ, et al. Missing steps in a staircase:a qualitative study of the perspectives of key stakeholders on the use of adaptive designs in confirmatory trials. Trials. 2015;16:430.
73. Gaydos B, Anderson KM, Berry D, et al. Good practices for adaptive trials in pharmaceutical product development. Drug Inf J. 2009;43:539–556.•• Recommendations on practical and operational aspects of adaptive trials.
74. Turnbull BW. Adaptive designs from a data safety monitoring board perspective:some controversies and some case studies. Clin Trials. 2017. ahead of print.
75. Gallo P, Chuang-Stein C, Dragalin V, et al. Adaptive design in clinical drug development–an executive summary of the PhRMA working group (with discussions). J Biopharm Stat. 2006;16:275–283.
76. Sanchez-Kam M, Gallo P, Loewy J, et al. A practical guide to data monitoring committees in adaptive trials. Ther Innovation Regul Sci. 2014;48:316–326.• Guidance for the data-monitoring committees
77. European Medicines Agency. Reflection paper on methodological issues in confirmatory clinical trials planned with an adaptive design. London; 2007. Available from:http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientific_guideline/2009/09/WC500003616.pdf
78. Zang Y, Lee JJ. Adaptive clinical trial designs in oncology. Chin Clin Oncol. 2014 Dec;3(4):49.
79. Dimairo M, Boote J, Julious SA, et al. Missing steps in a staircase:a qualitative study of the perspectives of key stakeholders on the use of adaptive designs in confirmatory trials. Trials. 2015;16:430.
80. Hatfield I, Allison A, Flight L, et al. Adaptive designs undertaken in clinical research:a review of registered clinical trials. Trials. 2016;17(1):150.
81. Lai TL, Lavori PW, Tsang KW. Adaptive design of confirmatory trials:advances and challenges. Contemp Clin Trials. 2015 Nov;45(Pt A):93–102.
82. Berry DA. Adaptive clinical trials in oncology. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2011 Nov 8;9(4):199–207.
83. Bhatt D, Mehta C. Adaptive designs for clinical trials. NEJM. 2016;375:65–74.• Nontechnical up-to-date review
84. Saville BR, Berry SM. Efficiencies of platform clinical trials:a vision of the future. Clin Trials. 2016;13:358–366.
85. Berry SM, Petzold EA, Dull P, et al. A response adaptive randomization platform trial for efficient evaluation of Ebola virus treatments:a model for pandemic response. Clin Trials. 2016 Feb;13(1):22–30.
86. Berry SM, Broglio KR, Groshen S, et al. Bayesian hierarchical modeling of patient subpopulations:efficient designs of Phase II oncology clinical trials. Clin Trials. 2013 Oct;10(5):720–734.
87. Antoniou M, Jorgensen AL, Kolamunnage-Dona R. biomarker-guided adaptive trial designs in phase ii and phase iii:a methodological review. PLoS One. 2016 Feb 24;11(2):e0149803.