-
Monitoring overall survival in pivotal trials in indolent cancers
Authors:
Thomas R Fleming,
Lisa V Hampson,
Bharani Bharani-Dharan,
Frank Bretz,
Arunava Chakravartty,
Thibaud Coroller,
Evanthia Koukouli,
Janet Wittes,
Nigel Yateman,
Emmanuel Zuber
Abstract:
Indolent cancers are characterized by long overall survival (OS) times. Therefore, powering a clinical trial to provide definitive assessment of the effects of an experimental intervention on OS in a reasonable timeframe is generally infeasible. Instead, the primary outcome in many pivotal trials is an intermediate clinical response such as progression-free survival (PFS). In several recently repo…
▽ More
Indolent cancers are characterized by long overall survival (OS) times. Therefore, powering a clinical trial to provide definitive assessment of the effects of an experimental intervention on OS in a reasonable timeframe is generally infeasible. Instead, the primary outcome in many pivotal trials is an intermediate clinical response such as progression-free survival (PFS). In several recently reported pivotal trials of interventions for indolent cancers that yielded promising results on an intermediate outcome, however, more mature data or post-approval trials showed concerning OS trends. These problematic results have prompted a keen interest in quantitative approaches for monitoring OS that can support regulatory decision-making related to the risk of an unacceptably large detrimental effect on OS. For example, the US Food and Drug Administration, the American Association for Cancer Research, and the American Statistical Association recently organized a one-day multi-stakeholder workshop entitled 'Overall Survival in Oncology Clinical Trials'. In this paper, we propose OS monitoring guidelines tailored for the setting of indolent cancers. Our pragmatic approach is modeled, in part, on the monitoring guidelines the FDA has used in cardiovascular safety trials conducted in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus. We illustrate proposals through application to several examples informed by actual case studies.
△ Less
Submitted 4 June, 2024; v1 submitted 31 October, 2023;
originally announced October 2023.
-
Joint modelling of longitudinal and time-to-event data applied to group sequential clinical trials
Authors:
Abigail J. Burdon,
Lisa V. Hampson,
Christopher Jennison
Abstract:
Often in Phase 3 clinical trials measuring a long-term time-to-event endpoint, such as overall survival or progression-free survival, investigators also collect repeated measures on biomarkers which may be predictive of the primary endpoint. Although these data may not be leveraged directly to support early stop** decisions, can we make greater use of these data to increase efficiency and improv…
▽ More
Often in Phase 3 clinical trials measuring a long-term time-to-event endpoint, such as overall survival or progression-free survival, investigators also collect repeated measures on biomarkers which may be predictive of the primary endpoint. Although these data may not be leveraged directly to support early stop** decisions, can we make greater use of these data to increase efficiency and improve interim decision making? We present a joint model for longitudinal and time-to-event data and a method which establishes the distribution of successive estimates of parameters in the joint model across interim analyses. With this in place, we can use the estimates to define both efficacy and futility stop** rules. Using simulation, we evaluate the benefits of incorporating biomarker information and the affects on interim decision making.
△ Less
Submitted 29 November, 2022;
originally announced November 2022.
-
Combining the target trial and estimand frameworks to define the causal estimand: an application using real-world data to contextualize a single-arm trial
Authors:
Lisa V Hampson,
Jufen Chu,
Aiesha Zia,
Jie Zhang,
Wei-Chun Hsu,
Craig Parzynski,
Yanni Hao,
Evgeny Degtyarev
Abstract:
Single-arm trials (SATs) may be used to support regulatory submissions in settings where there is a high unmet medical need and highly promising early efficacy data undermine the equipoise needed for randomization. In this context, patient-level real-world data (RWD) may be used to create an external control arm (ECA) to contextualize the SAT results. However, naive comparisons of the SAT with its…
▽ More
Single-arm trials (SATs) may be used to support regulatory submissions in settings where there is a high unmet medical need and highly promising early efficacy data undermine the equipoise needed for randomization. In this context, patient-level real-world data (RWD) may be used to create an external control arm (ECA) to contextualize the SAT results. However, naive comparisons of the SAT with its ECA will yield biased estimates of causal effects if groups are imbalanced with regards to (un)measured prognostic factors. Several methods are available to adjust for measured confounding, but the interpretation of such analyses is challenging unless the causal question of interest is clearly defined, and the estimator is aligned with the estimand. Additional complications arise when patients in the ECA are eligible for the SAT at multiple timepoints. In this paper, we use a case-study of a pivotal SAT of a novel CAR-T therapy for heavily pre-treated patients with follicular lymphoma to illustrate how a combination of the target trial and the ICH E9(R1) estimand frameworks can be used to define the target estimand and avoid common methodological pitfalls related to the design of the ECA and comparisons with the SAT. We also propose an approach to address the challenge of how to define an appropriate time zero for external controls who meet the SAT inclusion/exclusion criteria at several timepoints. Use of the target trial and estimand frameworks facilitates discussions amongst internal and external stakeholders, as well as an early assessment of the adequacy of the available RWD.
△ Less
Submitted 24 February, 2022;
originally announced February 2022.
-
Eliciting judgements about dependent quantities of interest: The SHELF extension and copula methods illustrated using an asthma case study
Authors:
Björn Holzhauer,
Lisa V. Hampson,
John Paul Gosling,
Björn Bornkamp,
Joseph Kahn,
Markus R. Lange,
Wen-Lin Luo,
Caterina Brindicci,
David Lawrence,
Steffen Ballerstedt,
Anthony O'Hagan
Abstract:
Pharmaceutical companies regularly need to make decisions about drug development programs based on the limited knowledge from early stage clinical trials. In this situation, eliciting the judgements of experts is an attractive approach for synthesising evidence on the unknown quantities of interest. When calculating the probability of success for a drug development program, multiple quantities of…
▽ More
Pharmaceutical companies regularly need to make decisions about drug development programs based on the limited knowledge from early stage clinical trials. In this situation, eliciting the judgements of experts is an attractive approach for synthesising evidence on the unknown quantities of interest. When calculating the probability of success for a drug development program, multiple quantities of interest - such as the effect of a drug on different endpoints - should not be treated as unrelated.
We discuss two approaches for establishing a multivariate distribution for several related quantities within the SHeffield ELicitation Framework (SHELF). The first approach elicits experts' judgements about a quantity of interest conditional on knowledge about another one. For the second approach, we first elicit marginal distributions for each quantity of interest. Then, for each pair of quantities, we elicit the concordance probability that both lie on the same side of their respective elicited medians. This allows us to specify a copula to obtain the joint distribution of the quantities of interest.
We show how these approaches were used in an elicitation workshop that was performed to assess the probability of success of the registrational program of an asthma drug. The judgements of the experts, which were obtained prior to completion of the pivotal studies, were well aligned with the final trial results.
△ Less
Submitted 15 February, 2021; v1 submitted 4 February, 2021;
originally announced February 2021.
-
Improving the assessment of the probability of success in late stage drug development
Authors:
Lisa V Hampson,
Björn Bornkamp,
Björn Holzhauer,
Joseph Kahn,
Markus R Lange,
Wen-Lin Luo,
Giovanni Della Cioppa,
Kelvin Stott,
Steffen Ballerstedt
Abstract:
There are several steps to confirming the safety and efficacy of a new medicine. A sequence of trials, each with its own objectives, is usually required. Quantitative risk metrics can be useful for informing decisions about whether a medicine should transition from one stage of development to the next. To obtain an estimate of the probability of regulatory approval, pharmaceutical companies may st…
▽ More
There are several steps to confirming the safety and efficacy of a new medicine. A sequence of trials, each with its own objectives, is usually required. Quantitative risk metrics can be useful for informing decisions about whether a medicine should transition from one stage of development to the next. To obtain an estimate of the probability of regulatory approval, pharmaceutical companies may start with industry-wide success rates and then apply to these subjective adjustments to reflect program-specific information. However, this approach lacks transparency and fails to make full use of data from previous clinical trials. We describe a quantitative Bayesian approach for calculating the probability of success (PoS) at the end of phase II which incorporates internal clinical data from one or more phase IIb studies, industry-wide success rates, and expert opinion or external data if needed. Using an example, we illustrate how PoS can be calculated accounting for differences between the phase IIb data and future phase III trials, and discuss how the methods can be extended to accommodate accelerated drug development pathways.
△ Less
Submitted 21 October, 2021; v1 submitted 4 February, 2021;
originally announced February 2021.
-
A Bayesian hierarchical model for bridging across patient subgroups in phase I clinical trials with animal data
Authors:
Haiyan Zheng,
Lisa V. Hampson,
Thomas Jaki
Abstract:
Incorporating preclinical animal data, which can be regarded as a special kind of historical data, into phase I clinical trials can improve decision making when very little about human toxicity is known. In this paper, we develop a robust hierarchical modelling approach to leverage animal data into new phase I clinical trials, where we bridge across non-overlap**, potentially heterogeneous patie…
▽ More
Incorporating preclinical animal data, which can be regarded as a special kind of historical data, into phase I clinical trials can improve decision making when very little about human toxicity is known. In this paper, we develop a robust hierarchical modelling approach to leverage animal data into new phase I clinical trials, where we bridge across non-overlap**, potentially heterogeneous patient subgroups. Translation parameters are used to bring both historical and contemporary data onto a common dosing scale. This leads to feasible exchangeability assumptions that the parameter vectors, which underpin the dose-toxicity relationship per study, are assumed to be drawn from a common distribution. Moreover, human dose-toxicity parameter vectors are assumed to be exchangeable either with the standardised, animal study-specific parameter vectors, or between themselves. Possibility of non-exchangeability for each parameter vector is considered to avoid inferences for extreme subgroups being overly influenced by the other. We illustrate the proposed approach with several trial data examples, and evaluate the operating characteristics of our model compared with several alternatives in a simulation study. Numerical results show that our approach yields robust inferences in circumstances, where data from multiple sources are inconsistent and/or the bridging assumptions are incorrect.
△ Less
Submitted 13 November, 2019;
originally announced November 2019.
-
A Bayesian decision-theoretic approach to incorporate preclinical information into phase I oncology trials
Authors:
Haiyan Zheng,
Lisa V. Hampson
Abstract:
Leveraging preclinical animal data for a phase I first-in-man trial is appealing yet challenging. A prior based on animal data may place large probability mass on values of the dose-toxicity model parameter(s), which appear infeasible in light of data accrued from the ongoing phase I clinical trial. In this paper, we seek to use animal data to improve decision making in a model-based dose-escalati…
▽ More
Leveraging preclinical animal data for a phase I first-in-man trial is appealing yet challenging. A prior based on animal data may place large probability mass on values of the dose-toxicity model parameter(s), which appear infeasible in light of data accrued from the ongoing phase I clinical trial. In this paper, we seek to use animal data to improve decision making in a model-based dose-escalation procedure for phase I oncology trials. Specifically, animal data are incorporated via a robust mixture prior for the parameters of the dose-toxicity relationship. This prior changes dynamically as the trial progresses. After completion of treatment for each cohort, the weight allocated to the informative component, obtained based on animal data alone, is updated using a decision-theoretic approach to assess the commensurability of the animal data with the human toxicity data observed thus far. In particular, we measure commensurability as a function of the utility of optimal prior predictions for the human responses (toxicity or no toxicity) on each administered dose. The proposed methodology is illustrated through several examples and an extensive simulation study. Results show that our proposal can address difficulties in co** with prior-data conflict commencing in sequential trials with a small sample size.
△ Less
Submitted 6 February, 2020; v1 submitted 3 July, 2019;
originally announced July 2019.
