Use of a two-sided tolerance interval in the design and evaluation of biosimilarity in clinical studies.

In assessing biosimilarity between two products, the question to ask is always "How similar is similar?" Traditionally, the equivalence of the means between products is the primary consideration in a clinical trial. This study suggests an alternative assessment for testing a certain percentage of the population of differences lying within a prespecified interval. In doing so, the accuracy and precision are assessed simultaneously by judging whether a two-sided tolerance interval falls within a prespecified acceptance range. We further derive an asymptotic distribution of the tolerance limits to determine the sample size for achieving a targeted level of power. Our numerical study shows that the proposed two-sided tolerance interval test controls the type I error rate and provides sufficient power. A real example is presented to illustrate our proposed approach.

Assessing the consistency of the treatment effect under the discrete random effects model in multiregional clinical trials.

In recent years, developing pharmaceutical products via multiregional clinical trials (MRCTs) has become standard. Traditionally, an MRCT would assume that a treatment effect is uniform across regions. However, heterogeneity among regions may have impact upon the evaluation of a medicine's effect. In this study, we consider a random effects model using discrete distribution (DREM) to account for heterogeneous treatment effects across regions for the design and evaluation of MRCTs. We derive an power function for a treatment that is beneficial under DREM and illustrate determination of the overall sample size in an MRCT. We use the concept of consistency based on Method 2 of the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour, and Welfare's guidance to evaluate the probability for treatment benefit and consistency under DREM. We further derive an optimal sample size allocation over regions to maximize the power for consistency. Moreover, we provide three algorithms for deriving sample size at the desired level of power for benefit and consistency. In practice, regional treatment effects are unknown. Thus, we provide some guidelines on the design of MRCTs with consistency when the regional treatment effect are assumed to fall into a specified interval. Numerical examples are given to illustrate applications of the proposed approach. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Design and evaluation of multiregional trials with heterogeneous treatment effect across regions.

To speed up drug development to allow faster access to medicines for patients globally, conducting multiregional trials incorporating subjects from many countries around the world under the same protocol may be desired. Several statistical methods have been proposed for the design and evaluation of multiregional trials. However, in most of the recent approaches for sample size determination in multiregional trials, a common treatment effect of the primary endpoint across regions is usually assumed. In practice, it might be expected that there is a difference in treatment effect due to regional difference (e.g., ethnic difference). In this article, a random effect model for heterogeneous treatment effect across regions is proposed for the design and evaluation of multiregional trials. We also address consideration of the determination of the number of subjects in a specific region to establish the consistency of treatment effects between the specific region and the entire group.

A multitope SARS-CoV-2 vaccine provides long-lasting B cell and T cell immunity against Delta and Omicron variants.

BackgroundThe Delta and Omicron variants of SARS-CoV-2 are currently responsible for breakthrough infections due to waning immunity. We report phase I/II trial results of UB-612, a multitope subunit vaccine containing S1-RBD-sFc protein and rationally designed promiscuous peptides representing sarbecovirus conserved helper T cell and cytotoxic T lymphocyte epitopes on the nucleocapsid (N), membrane (M), and spike (S2) proteins.MethodWe conducted a phase I primary 2-dose (28 days apart) trial of 10, 30, or 100 µg UB-612 in 60 healthy young adults 20 to 55 years old, and 50 of them were boosted with 100 µg of UB-612 approximately 7 to 9 months after the second dose. A separate placebo-controlled and randomized phase II study was conducted with 2 doses of 100 µg of UB-612 (n = 3,875, 18-85 years old). We evaluated interim safety and immunogenicity of phase I until 14 days after the third (booster) dose and of phase II until 28 days after the second dose.ResultsNo vaccine-related serious adverse events were recorded. The most common solicited adverse events were injection site pain and fatigue, mostly mild and transient. In both trials, UB-612 elicited respective neutralizing antibody titers similar to a panel of human convalescent sera. The most striking findings were long-lasting virus-neutralizing antibodies and broad T cell immunity against SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VoCs), including Delta and Omicron, and a strong booster-recalled memory immunity with high cross-reactive neutralizing titers against the Delta and Omicron VoCs.ConclusionUB-612 has presented a favorable safety profile, potent booster effect against VoCs, and long-lasting B and broad T cell immunity that warrants further development for both primary immunization and heterologous boosting of other COVID-19 vaccines.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04545749, NCT04773067, and NCT04967742.FundingUBI Asia, Vaxxinity Inc., and Taiwan Centers for Disease Control, Ministry of Health and Welfare.

Operational Experiences in China and Statistical Issues on the Conduct of Clinical Trials During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

The COVID-19 outbreak is impacting clinical trials in many ways, such as patient recruitment, data collection and data analysis. To proceed in this difficult time, the adoption of new technologies and new approaches for conducting clinical trials needs to be accelerated. Simultaneously, regulatory agencies such as the US FDA and EMA have issued guidance to help the pharmaceutical industry conduct clinical trials of medical products during the COVID-19 pandemic. In this article, we will address some statistical issues and operational experiences in the conduction of clinical trials during the COVID-19 pandemic. Specifically, we will share experiences in the applications of remote clinical trials in China. Statistical issues related to protocol modifications caused by COVID-19 will be raised.