Randomized Controlled Trials Versus Real World Evidence: Neither Magic Nor Myth.

Compared with drugs from the blockbuster era, recently authorized drugs and those expected in the future present a heterogenous mix of chemicals, biologicals, and cell and gene therapies, a sizable fraction being for rare diseases, and even individualized treatments or individualized combinations. The shift in the nature of products entails secular trends for the definitions of "drugs" and "target population" and for clinical use and evidence generation. We discuss that the lessons learned from evidence generation for 20th century medicines may have limited relevance for 21st century medicines. We explain why the future is not about randomized controlled trials (RCTs) vs. real-world evidence (RWE) but RCTs and RWE-not just for the assessment of safety but also of effectiveness. Finally, we highlight that, in the era of precision medicine, we may not be able to reliably describe some small treatment effects-either by way of RCTs or RWE.

Improving transparency to build trust in real-world secondary data studies for hypothesis testing-Why, what, and how: recommendations and a road map from the real-world evidence transparency initiative.

Real-world data (RWD) and the derivations of these data into real-world evidence (RWE) are rapidly expanding from informing healthcare decisions at the patient and health system level to influencing major health policy decisions, including regulatory approvals and coverage. Recent examples include the approval of palbociclib in combination with endocrine therapy for male breast cancer and the inclusion of RWE in the label of paliperidone palmitate for schizophrenia. This interest has created an urgency to develop processes that promote trust in the evidence-generation process. Key stakeholders and decision-makers include patients and their healthcare providers; learning health systems; health technology assessment bodies and payers; pharmacoepidemiologists and other clinical reseachers, and policy makers interested in bioethical and regulatory issues. A key to optimal uptake of RWE is transparency of the research process to enable decision-makers to evaluate the quality of the methods used and the applicability of the evidence that results from the RWE studies. Registration of RWE studies-particularly for hypothesis evaluating treatment effectiveness (HETE) studies-has been proposed to improve transparency, trust, and research replicability. Although registration would not guarantee better RWE studies would be conducted, it would encourage the prospective disclosure of study plans, timing, and rationale for modifications. A joint task force of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) and the International Society for Pharmacoepidemiology (ISPE) recommended that investigators preregister their RWE studies and post their study protocols in a publicly available forum before starting studies to reduce publication bias and improve the transparency of research methods. Recognizing that published recommendations alone are insufficient, especially without accessible registration options and with no incentives, a group of experts gathered on February 25 and 26, 2019, in National Harbor, Maryland, to explore the structural and practical challenges to the successful implementation of the recommendations of the ISPOR/ISPE task force for preregistration. This positioning article describes a plan for making registration of HETE RWE studies routine. The plan includes specifying the rationale for registering HETE RWE studies, the studies that should be registered, where and when these studies should be registered, how and when analytic deviations from protocols should be reported, how and when to publish results, and incentives to encourage registration. Table 1 summarizes the rationale, goals, and potential solutions that increase transparency, in addition to unique concerns about secondary data studies. Definitions of terms used throughout this report are provided in Table 2.

Improving Transparency to Build Trust in Real-World Secondary Data Studies for Hypothesis Testing-Why, What, and How: Recommendations and a Road Map from the Real-World Evidence Transparency Initiative.

Real-world data (RWD) and the derivations of these data into real-world evidence (RWE) are rapidly expanding from informing healthcare decisions at the patient and health system level to influencing major health policy decisions, including regulatory approvals and coverage. Recent examples include the approval of palbociclib in combination with endocrine therapy for male breast cancer and the inclusion of RWE in the label of paliperidone palmitate for schizophrenia. This interest has created an urgency to develop processes that promote trust in the evidence-generation process. Key stakeholders and decision-makers include patients and their healthcare providers; learning health systems; health technology assessment bodies and payers; pharmacoepidemiologists and other clinical reseachers, and policy makers interested in bioethical and regulatory issues. A key to optimal uptake of RWE is transparency of the research process to enable decision-makers to evaluate the quality of the methods used and the applicability of the evidence that results from the RWE studies. Registration of RWE studies-particularly for hypothesis evaluating treatment effectiveness (HETE) studies-has been proposed to improve transparency, trust, and research replicability. Although registration would not guarantee better RWE studies would be conducted, it would encourage the prospective disclosure of study plans, timing, and rationale for modifications. A joint task force of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) and the International Society for Pharmacoepidemiology (ISPE) recommended that investigators preregister their RWE studies and post their study protocols in a publicly available forum before starting studies to reduce publication bias and improve the transparency of research methods. Recognizing that published recommendations alone are insufficient, especially without accessible registration options and with no incentives, a group of experts gathered on February 25 and 26, 2019, in National Harbor, Maryland, to explore the structural and practical challenges to the successful implementation of the recommendations of the ISPOR/ISPE task force for preregistration. This positioning article describes a plan for making registration of HETE RWE studies routine. The plan includes specifying the rationale for registering HETE RWE studies, the studies that should be registered, where and when these studies should be registered, how and when analytic deviations from protocols should be reported, how and when to publish results, and incentives to encourage registration. Table 1 summarizes the rationale, goals, and potential solutions that increase transparency, in addition to unique concerns about secondary data studies. Definitions of terms used throughout this report are provided in Table 2.

Translational biomarkers: from preclinical to clinical a report of 2009 AAPS/ACCP Biomarker Workshop.

There have been some successes in qualifying biomarkers and applying them to drug development and clinical treatment of various diseases. A recent success is illustrated by a collaborative effort among the US Food and Drug Administration, the European Medicines Agency, and the pharmaceutical industry to provide a set of seven preclinical kidney toxicity biomarkers for drug development. Other successes include, but are not limited to, clinical biomarkers for cancer treatment and clinical management of heart transplant patients. The value of fully qualified surrogate endpoints in facilitating successful drug development is undisputed, especially for diseases in which the traditional clinical outcome can only be assessed in large, multi-year trials. Emerging biomarkers, including chemical genomic or imaging biomarkers, and measurement of circulating tumor cells hold great promise for early diagnosis of disease and as prognostic tests for managing treatment of chronic diseases such as osteoarthritis, Alzheimer disease, cardiovascular disease, and cancer. To advance the success of treating and managing these diseases, efforts are needed to establish the temporal relationship between changes in inflammatory or imaging biomarkers with the progression of the chronic disease, and in the case of cancer, between the extent of circulating cancer cells and tumor progression or remission.

Clinical pharmacology study of Bramitob, a tobramycin solution for nebulization, in comparison with Tobi.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: To compare in vitro characteristics and pharmacokinetics of Bramitob, a preservative-free tobramycin solution for nebulization, and Tobi in patients with cystic fibrosis (CF) and Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection. METHODS: In vitro characteristics of Bramitob and Tobi were evaluated using Pari TurboBoy/LC Plus and the Systam 290 LS nebulizers. In the randomized, double-blind, two-way crossover pharmacokinetic study, 11 patients with CF received a single nebulized dose (300mg) of Bramitob or Tobi, separated by a 7-day washout period. Plasma and sputum tobramycin concentrations were measured immediately before and over 24 hours after administration. RESULTS: Bramitob and Tobi performed alike during nebulization. The fine particle fraction was 33-37% and the mass median aerodynamic diameter was <5microm. Nine patients completed the pharmacokinetic study. Tobramycin plasma profiles after administration of Bramitob or Tobi were similar, with a peak at 90 and 72 minutes after inhalation of Bramitob and Tobi, respectively. The elimination half-life was ~5 hours for both products. The relative bioavailability of Bramitob to Tobi was 1.01, indicating comparable systemic exposure. Peak sputum concentration of tobramycin was 816 +/- 681 microg/g for Tobi and 1289 +/- 851 microg/g for Bramitob and was >400 microg/g (threshold sufficient for an antibacterial effect against P. aeruginosa) in 5 out of 9 patients receiving Tobi and 8 out of 9 patients receiving Bramitob. All adverse events were considered mild and judged not related to the study drugs. CONCLUSIONS: In vitro performance of Bramitob((R)) was similar when nebulized with Pari TurboBoy k/LC Plus and Systam 290 LS nebulizers and comparable to that of TobiThe systemic bioavailability of tobramycin was similar after administration of either Bramitob or Tobi; however, in sputum samples the tobramycin peak concentration was slightly greater after administration of Bramitob than after Tobi.

Should 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonists be administered beyond 24 hours after chemotherapy to prevent delayed emesis? Systematic re-evaluation of clinical evidence and drug cost implications.

PURPOSE: 5-Hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonists (5-HT(3) antagonists) are effective for preventing acute chemotherapy-induced emesis but the benefits of continuing administration of these agents beyond 24 hours after chemotherapy (delayed emesis) remain unclear. The purpose of this study was to provide estimates of clinical efficacy and drug acquisition cost associated with administering 5-HT(3) antagonists beyond 24 hours, as monotherapy or as added to dexamethasone. METHODS: This analysis is based on the Cancer Care Ontario Practice Guidelines Initiative meta-analysis of the efficacy of 5-HT(3) antagonists. Results from the clinical trials covered in that meta-analysis were reanalyzed to provide estimates of absolute risk reductions (ARR) and numbers needed to treat (NNT) for 5-HT(3) antagonists, as monotherapy or as adjunct treatment. Numbers of 5-HT(3) antagonist unit doses per successfully treated patient were also calculated. RESULTS: Five studies (comprising 1,716 assessable patients) compared a 5-HT(3) antagonist with placebo; five studies (2,240 patients) compared a combination of a 5-HT(3) antagonist and dexamethasone with dexamethasone monotherapy. ARR for monotherapy was only 8.2% (95% CI, 3.0% to 13.4%). On average, 74 5-HT(3) antagonist doses must be administered to 12 patients (NNT, 12.2; 95% CI, 7.5 to 33.4) not receiving dexamethasone to protect one patient from delayed emesis. In those patients receiving dexamethasone as standard antiemetic treatment in the delayed phase, the addition of a 5-HT(3) antagonist did not significantly improve control of delayed emesis as compared with dexamethasone monotherapy (ARR, 2.6%; 95% CI, -0.6% to 5.8%). CONCLUSION: Neither clinical evidence nor considerations of cost effectiveness justify using 5-HT(3) antagonists beyond 24 hours after chemotherapy for prevention of delayed emesis.

Rofecoxib attenuates both primary and secondary inflammatory hyperalgesia: a randomized, double blinded, placebo controlled crossover trial in the UV-B pain model.

The analysis of drug's influence on peripheral and central sensitisation can give useful information about its mode of action and can lead to more efficacy in the treatment of pain. Peripheral inflammation is associated with peripheral expression and up-regulation of cyclooxygenase 2 (COX-2) in the CNS. The relative contribution of COX-2 mediated central sensitisation may be prominent under inflammatory conditions. In this randomized, double blinded, placebo controlled cross-over trial the effects of multidoses of the COX-2 selective inhibitor rofecoxib on primary and secondary hyperalgesia were evaluated in the UVB pain model. Twenty-four hours after local UVB irradiation at the upper leg of 42 healthy volunteers heat pain perception (HPPT) and heat pain tolerance thresholds (HPTT) were assessed within the inflammation. The area of secondary hyperalgesia was determined by pin prick test. Subjects received oral rofecoxib 50, 250, 500 mg or placebo. Pain testing was repeated after 3 and 6 h. Compared to placebo, rofecoxib significantly increased HPPT (1.55 and 1.08 degrees C, P<0.0001 and P=0.0333), HPTT (1.74 and 1.58 degrees C, P<0.0001 and P<0.0001), and reduced the mean area of secondary hyperalgesia by 15.6% (P=0.007) and 16.8% (P<0.001) after 3 and 6 h. No significant difference between the three dosage groups was observed. These data confirm peripheral effects of rofecoxib in a human inflammatory UV-B pain model and provide circumstantial evidence that even a standard clinical dose of rofecoxib reduces central hyperalgesia in inflammatory pain. We confirm that the effect of single oral dose of rofecoxib plateaus at 50 mg.

Pharmacodynamics of active site-inhibited factor VIIa in endotoxin-induced coagulation in humans.

BACKGROUND: Inhibition of the tissue factor-factor VIIa pathway attenuated the activation of coagulation and prevented death in a gram-negative bacteremia primate model of sepsis. This lethal animal model suggested that tissue factor also influences inflammatory cascades. METHODS: This trial examined the pharmacodynamic effects of active site-inhibited factor VIIa (FFR-recombinant factor VIIa [rFVIIa]; ASIS) on endotoxin-induced procoagulant, fibrinolytic, and inflammatory responses in healthy humans. A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study was conducted in 12 healthy male volunteers. Subjects received a bolus infusion of 2-ng/kg endotoxin, followed by a bolus infusion of ASIS (400 microg/kg) or placebo 10 minutes later. RESULTS: Endotoxin injection induced inflammation, activation of coagulation, and activation and subsequent inhibition of fibrinolysis. ASIS infusion completely blocked thrombin and fibrin generation, as measured by plasma levels of prothrombin fragment (no increase in the ASIS group, as compared with a 13-fold increase in the placebo group at 4 hours; P <.01), soluble fibrin, and fibrin split product D-dimer. ASIS did not alter endotoxin-induced changes in the fibrinolytic system, cytokine levels, or markers of endothelial (E-selectin, thrombomodulin) or platelet (P-selectin) activation. CONCLUSIONS: In summary, ASIS effectively and selectively attenuates tissue factor-induced thrombin generation. Because ASIS was well tolerated, this study provides seminal data to further characterize its anticoagulant and putative anti-inflammatory effects in critically ill patients.

Bcl-xL antisense oligonucleotides chemosensitize human glioblastoma cells.

BACKGROUND: Resistance to chemotherapy in glioblastoma has been linked to the expression of antiapoptotic Bcl-2 family members including Bcl-xL. METHODS: Bcl-xL expression was specifically reduced in M059K glioblastoma cells with antisense oligonucleotides (ISIS 16009, ISIS 16967) as assessed by Western blotting. Induction of apoptosis by treatment with antisense oligonucleotides in combination with paclitaxel in cell culture was monitored by WST-1 assays and flow cytometric analysis. RESULTS: Antisense oligonucleotide-mediated reduction of Bcl-xL levels led to enhanced cytotoxicity in M059K cells when compared to the use of a mismatch control oligonucleotide (p < 0.001). A decreased threshold for the induction of apoptosis led to significantly enhanced cytotoxic responses to paclitaxel treatment in WST-1 assays (p < 0.001) and flow cytometric analyses. CONCLUSION: Combination treatment using Bcl-xL antisense oligonucleotides and paclitaxel may qualify as a promising strategy to ultimately improve the clinical outcome of glioblastoma.

Antitumor effect of G3139 Bcl-2 antisense oligonucleotide is independent of its immune stimulation by CpG motifs in SCID mice.

The Bcl-2 antisense oligonucleotide (AS-ODN) G3139 chemosensitizes human malignancies by downregulating the antiapoptotic protein Bcl-2. Because G3139 contains two potential immunostimulatory CpG motifs, we asked if immune stimulation contributes to the antitumor activity observed previously. 5'-Methylation of cytosines in CpG motifs abrogates immune stimulation by oligonucleotides. We, therefore, studied the antitumor and immunostimulatory potential of G3139 vs. an identical oligonucleotide, except for methylation of cytosines in the two CpG motifs (G4232). In a human melanoma SCID mouse xenotransplantation model, G3139 or G4232 was administered by continuous subcutaneous (s.c.) or bolus intraperitoneal (i.p.) infusion. Both G3139 and G4232 significantly reduced tumor growth by about one third relative to the saline-treated group. Furthermore, we noted a similar downregulation of Bcl-2 expression and increase in tumor cell apoptosis caused by G3139 and G4232 compared with saline controls. However, mice treated with G3139 had a pronounced increase in spleen weight and interleukin-12 (IL-12) plasma levels relative to mice treated with either G4232 or saline. Splenomegaly and elevated IL-12 plasma levels suggest that G3139 can be immunostimulatory. However, there is clear evidence that the antitumor effect of G3139 in this model appears to be a Bcl-2 antisense effect that is independent of immune stimulation, as G3139 and its immune-silent counterpart G4232 caused similar tumor suppression and apoptosis induction.