A Bayesian phase II proof-of-concept design for clinical trials with longitudinal endpoints.

Existing phase II clinical trial designs focus on a single scalar endpoint, such as a binary, continuous, or survival endpoint. In some clinical trials, such as pain management studies, the efficacy endpoint of interest is measured longitudinally. We propose a Bayesian phase II design for such clinical trials. We model the longitudinal measurement process using Bayesian hierarchical model, where subject-specific trajectory shrinks toward the population trajectory to borrow information across subjects. The Bayesian penalized spline is used to model subject-specific and population trajectories without making strong parametric assumption on their shapes. We use the area under the curve of the trajectory as the summary of the treatment effect over time. The design takes a group sequential approach and takes into account both statistical significance and clinical relevance. Bayesian criteria is proposed to make interim and final decisions based on the evidence of statistical significance and clinical relevance. The proposed design is highly flexible and can accommodate trials with one or multiple longitudinal endpoints, as well as a longitudinal primary endpoint with a secondary endpoint. Simulation study shows that the proposed design is robust with desirable operating characteristics.

Effect of Dengue Serostatus on Dengue Vaccine Safety and Efficacy.

BACKGROUND: In efficacy trials of a tetravalent dengue vaccine (CYD-TDV), excess hospitalizations for dengue were observed among vaccine recipients 2 to 5 years of age. Precise risk estimates according to observed dengue serostatus could not be ascertained because of the limited numbers of samples collected at baseline. We developed a dengue anti-nonstructural protein 1 (NS1) IgG enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and used samples from month 13 to infer serostatus for a post hoc analysis of safety and efficacy. METHODS: In a case-cohort study, we reanalyzed data from three efficacy trials. For the principal analyses, we used baseline serostatus determined on the basis of measured (when baseline values were available) or imputed (when baseline values were missing) titers from a 50% plaque-reduction neutralization test (PRNT50), with imputation conducted with the use of covariates that included the month 13 anti-NS1 assay results. The risk of hospitalization for virologically confirmed dengue (VCD), of severe VCD, and of symptomatic VCD according to dengue serostatus was estimated by weighted Cox regression and targeted minimum loss-based estimation. RESULTS: Among dengue-seronegative participants 2 to 16 years of age, the cumulative 5-year incidence of hospitalization for VCD was 3.06% among vaccine recipients and 1.87% among controls, with a hazard ratio (vaccine vs. control) through data cutoff of 1.75 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.14 to 2.70). Among dengue-seronegative participants 9 to 16 years of age, the cumulative incidence of hospitalization for VCD was 1.57% among vaccine recipients and 1.09% among controls, with a hazard ratio of 1.41 (95% CI, 0.74 to 2.68). Similar trends toward a higher risk among seronegative vaccine recipients than among seronegative controls were also found for severe VCD. Among dengue-seropositive participants 2 to 16 years of age and those 9 to 16 years of age, the cumulative incidence of hospitalization for VCD was 0.75% and 0.38%, respectively, among vaccine recipients and 2.47% and 1.88% among controls, with hazard ratios of 0.32 (95% CI, 0.23 to 0.45) and 0.21 (95% CI, 0.14 to 0.31). The risk of severe VCD was also lower among seropositive vaccine recipients than among seropositive controls. CONCLUSIONS: CYD-TDV protected against severe VCD and hospitalization for VCD for 5 years in persons who had exposure to dengue before vaccination, and there was evidence of a higher risk of these outcomes in vaccinated persons who had not been exposed to dengue. (Funded by Sanofi Pasteur; ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT00842530 , NCT01983553 , NCT01373281 , and NCT01374516 .).

Qualitative consistency of treatment effects in multiregional clinical trials.

Consistency of treatment effects across different regions in multiregional clinical trials (MRCTs) has been an important question for the regulatory authorities. Many consistency definitions are proposed in literature. One of the definitions of consistency is expressed as qualitative consistency, whereas inconsistency is defined as qualitative treatment by region interaction. This article focuses on the qualitative consistency and extends Gail-Simon and Sasabuchi's one-sided multivariate likelihood ratio tests. Simulations are used to evaluate operating characteristics of these qualitative consistency assessment approaches. For a given number of regions, the guideline for setting significance level, and consistency cut-off are explored.

Safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy of a Clostridioides difficile toxoid vaccine candidate: a phase 3 multicentre, observer-blind, randomised, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: In the absence of a licensed vaccine, Clostridioides (formerly Clostridium) difficile infection represents a substantial health burden. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy, immunogenicity, and safety of a toxoid vaccine candidate. METHODS: We did a phase 3 multicentre, observer-blind, randomised, controlled trial at 326 hospitals, clinics, and clinical research centres in 27 countries in the USA, Canada, Latin America, Europe, and the Asia-Pacific region. We included adults aged 50 years or older who were considered to be at an increased risk of C difficile infection because they had previously had two hospital stays (each ≥24 h in duration) and had received systemic antibiotics in the previous 12 months (risk stratum 1), or because they were anticipating being admitted to hospital for 72 h or more for elective surgery within 60 days of enrolment (risk stratum 2). Eligible participants were stratified by geographical region and the two risk strata, and randomly assigned (2:1), with a fixed block size of three, to receive either a C difficile toxoid vaccine candidate, containing toxoids A and B (C difficile vaccine candidate group), or a placebo vaccine (placebo group). Participants, investigators, and personnel responsible for collecting safety data and analysing blood and stool samples were masked to group assignment. Personnel responsible for study product preparation and administration were not masked to group assignment. One dose (0·5 mL) of C difficile vaccine candidate or placebo vaccine was administered intramuscularly on days 0, 7, and 30. The primary outcome was the efficacy of the vaccine in preventing symptomatic C difficile infection, defined as having three or more loose stools in a period of 24 h or less, loose stools for 24 h or more, and a PCR-positive test for C difficile toxin B in a loose stool sample, within 3 years after the final vaccine dose. The primary outcome was measured in the modified intention-to-treat population (ie, all participants who received at least one injection of the assigned vaccine). The safety of the vaccine was assessed in the safety analysis set (ie, all participants who had received at least one injection, analysed according to the product received). This study is registered with WHO/ICTRP, number U111-1127-7162, and ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01887912, and has been terminated. FINDINGS: Between July 30, 2013, and Nov 17, 2017, we enrolled and randomly assigned 9302 participants to the C difficile vaccine candidate group (n=6201) or to the placebo group (n=3101). 6173 (99·5%) participants in the C difficile vaccine candidate group and 3085 (99·5%) participants in the placebo group received at least one dose of the vaccine. The study was terminated after the first planned interim analysis because of futility. In the C difficile vaccine candidate group, 34 C difficile infections were reported over 11 697·2 person-years at risk (0·29 infections per 100 person-years [95% CI 0·20-0·41]) compared with 16 C difficile infections over 5789·4 person-years at risk in the placebo group (0·28 infections per 100 person-years [0·16-0·45]), indicating a vaccine efficacy of -5·2% (95% CI -104·1 to 43·5). In the C difficile vaccine candidate group, 2847 (46·6%) of 6113 participants reported an adverse event within 30 days of injection compared with 1282 (41·9%) of 3057 participants in the placebo group. The proportion of participants who had an adverse event leading to study discontinuation was 4·8% in both groups (296 participants in the C difficile vaccine candidate group and 146 participants in the placebo group). 1662 (27·2%) participants in the C difficile vaccine candidate group reported at least one serious adverse event compared with 851 (27·8%) participants in the placebo group. INTERPRETATION: In adults at risk for C difficile infection, a bivalent C difficile toxoid vaccine did not prevent C difficile infection. Since the C difficile vaccine candidate met the criteria for futility, the study was terminated and clinical development of this vaccine candidate was stopped. FUNDING: Sanofi Pasteur.

Hybrid clinical trials to generate real-world evidence: design considerations from a sponsor's perspective.

Randomized controlled trials have traditionally been the gold standard for evaluating efficacy and safety of medical products and for regulatory decision-making. With the advancement of information technologies, vast amounts of data pertinent to patient health status and health care delivery are becoming available from a variety of real-world sources, including electronic health records, medical claims, patient registries, and patient-generated data. In 2016, the United States Congress passed the 21st Century Cures Act, mandating the U.S. FDA to establish a program to evaluate the potential use of real-world evidence (RWE) for regulatory purposes. In 2018, the FDA published the framework on its RWE program. One particular study type identified in the framework is the hybrid design - integration of a traditional randomized controlled trial with pragmatic design aspects to collect real-world data on patients. This design preserves the benefit of randomization, provides real-world outcome data while potentially accelerating product development and lowering the cost of data collection and patient follow-up. Here we focus on design considerations for hybrid trials to support regulatory decisions and provide a sponsor's perspective. While applicable to all medical products, we emphasize vaccine development where such hybrid designs are particularly useful given the low incidence rate of some vaccine-preventable clinical outcomes. We propose program strategies on how such hybrid designs may be integrated into a clinical development plan, illustrated by three examples. Major challenges are discussed and recommendations provided. Given the promise of hybrid designs and the challenges in implementation, we encourage proactive discussion with health authorities.

Lessons Learned From Multi-regional Trials With Signals of Treatment Effect Heterogeneity.

Inconsistent results across regions have been reported in a number of recent large trials. In this research, by reviewing results from studies that showed inconsistent treatment effects, and summarizing lessons learned, we provide some recommendations for minimizing the chance of inconsistency and allowing more accurate interpretation when such signs of heterogeneity arise, for example: keep the number of regions for consistency evaluation at a minimum to avoid observing false inconsistency signals; proactively address in the protocol the differences in culture, medical practices, and other factors that are potentially different across regions; closely monitor the blinded data from early-enrolled patients to more effectively identify and address issues such as imbalance of baseline covariates or inconsistency of primary outcome rates across regions. For treatments of life-threatening conditions, the stakes for accurate interpretation of MRCT results are high; the criteria for decisions warrant careful consideration.

Example-based illustrations of design, conduct, analysis and result interpretation of multi-regional clinical trials.

Extensive research has been conducted in the Multi-Regional Clinical Trial (MRCT) area. To effectively apply an appropriate approach to a MRCT, we need to synthesize and understand the features of different approaches. In this paper, examples are used to illustrate considerations regarding design, conduct, analysis and interpretation of result of MRCTs. We start with a brief discussion of region definitions and the scenarios where different regions have differing requirements for a MRCT. We then compare different designs and models as well as the corresponding interpretation of the results. We highlight the importance of paying special attention to trial monitoring and conduct to prevent potential issues associated with the final trial results. Besides evaluating the overall treatment effect for the entire MRCT, we also consider other key analyses including quantification of regional treatment effects within a MRCT, and assessment of consistency of these regional treatment effects.

Consistency assessment with global and bridging development strategies in emerging markets.

Global trial strategy with the participation of all major regions including countries from emerging markets surely increases new drug development efficiency. Nevertheless, there are circumstances in which some countries in emerging markets cannot join the original global trial. To evaluate the extrapolability of the original trial results to a new country, a bridging trial in the country has to be conducted. In this paper, we first evaluate the efficiency loss of the bridging trial strategy compared to that of the global trial strategy as a function of between-study variability from consistency assessment perspective. The provided evidence should encourage countries in emerging markets to make a greater effort to participate in the original global trial. We then discuss sample size requirement for desired assurance probability for consistency assessment based on various approaches for both global and bridging trial strategies. Examples are presented for numerical demonstration and comparisons.