A prospective proof-of-concept trial on the effect of personalized dosages of follitropin delta in intrauterine insemination.

RESEARCH QUESTION: What is the efficacy and safety of individualized follitropin delta dosing for ovarian stimulation in intrauterine insemination (IUI)? DESIGN: This single-centre, prospective, open-label, single-cohort study involving 106 patients established an original dosing regimen based on body weight and anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) concentrations, with adjustments based on the ovarian response from the previous IUI cycle. Each participant was enrolled in a maximum of three IUI cycles. RESULTS: Mean age was 34.5 ± 4.5 years, mean weight 69.2 ± 11.2 kg, mean AMH 15.7 ± 8.6 pmol/l, mean FSH 6.3 ± 2.6 IU/l and mean antral follicle count 16.4 ± 8.2. The percentage of patients who produced more than three mature follicles was 1.9%, 0% and 1.5%, respectively, for the three IUI cycles. The percentage of patients with two or three mature follicles was 34.0%, 36.9% and 47.1% for the three IUI cycles. The clinical pregnancy rate per IUI cycle was 17.9%, 14.3% and 17.6% for the three cycles, with a cumulative clinical pregnancy rate of 40.6%. Out of 258 cycles, 43 (16.7%) resulted in clinical pregnancy, with six of those resulting in multiple pregnancies (14.0%). Two resulted in spontaneous reduction within the first trimester and four resulted in live twin births, representing only 1.6% of the total cycles. CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first to utilize follitropin delta for stimulation in IUI. It demonstrates that individualized dosing is both effective and safe, resulting in satisfactory cumulative pregnancy rates and an acceptable multiple pregnancy rate, thus achieving the primary objectives of the research.

Decentralized Clinical Trials: Scientific Considerations Through the Lens of the Estimand Framework.

While industry and regulators' interest in decentralized clinical trials (DCTs) is long-standing, the Covid-19 pandemic accelerated and broadened the adoption and experience with these trials. The key idea in decentralization is bringing the clinical trial design, typically on-site, closer to the patient's experience (on-site or off-site). Thus, potential benefits of DCTs include reducing the burden of participation in trials, broadening access to a more diverse population, or using innovative endpoints collected off-site. This paper helps researchers to carefully evaluate the added value and the implications of DCTs beyond the operational aspects of their implementation. The proposed approach is to use the ICH E9(R1) estimand framework to guide the strategic decisions around each decentralization component. Furthermore, the framework can guide the process for clinical trialists to systematically consider the implications of decentralization, in turn, for each attribute of the estimand. We illustrate the use of this approach with a fully DCT case study and show that the proposed systematic process can uncover the scientific opportunities, assumptions, and potential risks associated with a possible use of decentralization components in the design of a trial. This process can also highlight the benefits of specifying estimand attributes in a granular way. Thus, we demonstrate that bringing a decentralization component into the design will not only impact estimators and estimation but can also correspond to addressing more granular questions, thereby uncovering new target estimands.

Perspectives on Virtual (Remote) Clinical Trials as the "New Normal" to Accelerate Drug Development.

Although the digital revolution has transformed many areas of human endeavor, pharmaceutical drug development has been relatively slow to embrace the emerging technologies to enhance efficiency and optimize value in clinical trials. The topic has garnered even greater attention in the face of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak, which has caused unprecedented disruption in the conduct of clinical trials and presented considerable challenges and opportunities for clinical trialists and data analysts. In this paper, we highlight the potential opportunity with virtual or digital clinical trials as viable options to enhance efficiency in drug development and, more importantly, in offering diverse patients easier and attractive means to participate in clinical trials. Special reference is made to the implication of artificial intelligence and machine-learning tools in trial execution and data acquisition, processing, and analysis in a virtual trial setting. Issues of patient safety, measurement validity, and data integrity are reviewed, and considerations are put forth with reference to the mitigation of underlying regulatory and operational barriers.

Dual staining for p16/Ki-67 to detect high-grade cervical lesions: Results from the Screening Triage Ascertaining Intraepithelial Neoplasia by Immunostain Testing study.

We compared clinical performance of p16/Ki-67 dual-stained cytology and human papillomavirus (HPV) genotyping, via different algorithms-alone, or in combination with cytology-to identify cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) and grade 3 or worse (CIN3+) in women referred to as colposcopy. We included 492 cervical specimens (134 normal, 130 CIN1, 99 CIN2, 121 CIN3, 8 cancers) randomly selected from 1158 specimens with valid conventional cytology, HPV (cobas 4800 HPV test) and biopsy results. Dual-stained cytology was retrospectively performed (CINtec PLUS assay) on PreservCyt material; slides were read by a cytologist and confirmed by two pathologists, blinded to cytology, biopsy and genotyping results. Sensitivity and specificity (95% confidence intervals in parentheses) of dual-stained cytology to detect CIN2+ and CIN3+ were compared to other screening tests available for the same women. Positivity rate for dual-stained cytology increased with histological severity: 30.6% in normal, 41.5% in CIN1, 72.7% in CIN2, 86.8% in CIN3 and 87.5% in cancer. Dual-stained cytology alone had lower sensitivity than HPV testing for CIN2+ [80.7% (75.0-85.6) vs 89.9% (85.3-93.5)] and CIN3+ [86.8% (79.7-92.1) vs 92.3% (86.2-96.2)]. However, corresponding specificity values were higher [64.0% (57.9-69.8) vs 56.1% (49.8-62.1) for CIN2+; 54.0% (48.7-59.2) vs 44.4% (39.2-49.6) for CIN3+]. Combining dual-stained cytology with an ASC-US abnormality threshold decreased specificity to 31.4% (25.9-37.4) for CIN2+ and 24.2% (19.9-29.0) for CIN3+. The corresponding values considering low squamous intraepithelial lesion threshold values were 42.8% (36.8-49.0) and 35.0% (30.1-40.1). Dual-stained cytology and HPV testing exhibited similar performance, although the former improved the specificity by 7.9% and 9.6% for CIN2+ and CIN3+, respectively.

Use of Placental Growth Factor for Trisomy 21 Screening in Pregnancy: A Systematic Review.

Background Prenatal serum screening is an important modality to screen for aneuploidy in pregnancy. The addition of placental growth factor (PLGF) to screen for trisomy 21 remains controversial. Objective To determine whether the addition of PLGF to combined serum aneuploidy screening improves detection rates (DRs) for trisomy 21. Study Design We performed a systematic review of the literature until October 2019 to determine the benefits of adding PLGF to prenatal screening. We performed a goodness-of-fit test and retrieved the coefficient of determinations ( R 2 ) as a function of false positive rates (FPRs), providing mean-weighted improvements in the DRs after accounting for PLGF levels. Results We identified 51 studies, of which 8 met inclusion criteria (834 aneuploidy cases and 105,904 euploid controls). DRs were proportional to FPR across all studies, ranging from 59.0 to 95.3% without PLGF and 61.0 to 96.3% with PLGF (FPR 1-5%). Goodness-of-fit regression analysis revealed a logarithmic distribution of DRs as a function of the FPR, with R 2 = 0.109 (no PLGF) and R 2 = 0.06 (PLGF). Two-sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov's test reveals a p -value of 0.44. Overall, addition of PLGF improves DRs of 3.3% for 1% FPR, 1.7% for 3% FPR, and 1.4% for 5% FPR, respectively. Conclusion Addition of PLGF to prenatal screening using serum analytes mildly improves trisomy 21 DRs as a function of FPRs.

EMA Review of Daunorubicin and Cytarabine Encapsulated in Liposomes (Vyxeos, CPX-351) for the Treatment of Adults with Newly Diagnosed, Therapy-Related Acute Myeloid Leukemia or Acute Myeloid Leukemia with Myelodysplasia-Related Changes.

On June 28, 2018, the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use adopted a positive opinion, recommending the granting of a marketing authorization for the medicinal product Vyxeos, intended for the treatment of acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Vyxeos was designated as an orphan medicinal product on January 11, 2012. The applicant for this medicinal product was Jazz Pharmaceuticals Ireland Limited. Vyxeos is a liposomal formulation of a fixed combination of daunorubicin and cytarabine, antineoplastic agents that inhibit topoisomerase II activity and also cause DNA damage. The strength of Vyxeos is 5 units/mL, where 1 unit equals 1.0 mg cytarabine plus 0.44 mg daunorubicin. The marketing authorization holder Jazz Pharmaceuticals had found that this was an optimal ratio for the efficacy of the product. Study CLTR0310-301, a phase III, multicenter, randomized, trial of Vyxeos (daunorubicin-cytarabine) liposome injection versus standard 3+7 daunorubicin and cytarabine in patients aged 60-75 years with untreated high-risk (secondary) AML, showed a statistically significant difference between the two groups in overall survival (OS) with a median OS of 9.56 months in the daunorubicin-cytarabine arm compared with 5.95 months for standard chemotherapy (hazard ratio, 0.69; 95% confidence interval, 0.52-0.90; one-sided p = .003). The most common side effects were hypersensitivity including rash, febrile neutropenia, edema, diarrhea/colitis, mucositis, fatigue, musculoskeletal pain, abdominal pain, decreased appetite, cough, headache, chills, arrhythmia, pyrexia, sleep disorders, and hypotension. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Vyxeos has demonstrated a clinically significant improvement in overall survival compared with the standard of care 7+3 in the proposed population of patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML) with myelodysplasia-related changes and therapy-related AML. This is remarkable given the very poor prognosis of these patients and their unmet medical need. Secondary endpoints support the primary outcome, in particular an increased rate of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, which is potentially the only curative treatment in AML.

Current Statistical Considerations and Regulatory Perspectives on the Planning of Confirmatory Basket, Umbrella, and Platform Trials.

Master protocols have received a growing interest during the last years. By assigning patients to specific substudies, they aim at targeting and accelerating clinical development. Given their complexity, basket, umbrella, and platform designs have raised challenging regulatory and statistical questions, especially the control of multiplicity in confirmatory trials. In basket trials, regulatory assessment of the benefit/risk in pooled populations and choice of the treatment indication is challenging. We provide here our perspectives on these topics. In master protocols, as long as the statistical hypotheses tested between the different substudies are independent, no supplementary adjustment for multiplicity over the different substudies should be required. Moreover, sharing a control arm within an umbrella or a platform trial investigating different drugs would not require a correction for the type I error rate, whereas the chance of multiple false positive regulatory decisions should be recognized. In basket trials, pooling across substudies requires a rationale supporting the intended indication and should be preplanned. Assessment of the benefit/risk in pooled target populations can be complicated by differences in design or in efficacy/safety signals between the substudies. While trials governed by a master protocol can offer logistic and financial advantages, more experience is needed to gain a deeper insight into this novel framework.

Genome-wide DNA methylation profiling identifies two novel genes in cervical neoplasia.

DNA methylation analysis may improve risk stratification in cervical screening. We used a pan-epigenomic approach to identify new methylation markers along the continuum of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) to cervical cancer. Physician-collected samples (54 normal, 50 CIN1, 40 CIN2 and 42 CIN3) were randomly selected from women at a single-center colposcopy clinic. Extracted DNA was subjected to Illumina Infinium EPIC array analysis, and methylation was assessed blinded to histopathological and clinical data. CpG sites whose state of methylation correlated with lesion grade were assessed (Spearman correlation), and a weighted methylation score was calculated comparing normal to CIN3. Validation of the top selected genes was performed in an independent cohort (100 normal, 50 CIN1, 50 CIN2, 50 CIN3 and 8 cervical cancers) of new patients, referred for colposcopic examination at three hospitals, using targeted DNA methylation Illumina amplicon sequencing. The relationship between a combined weighted marker score and progression from normal through precancerous lesions and cervical cancer was compared using one-way ANOVA. Our analyses revealed 7,715 CpGs whose methylation level correlated with progression (from normal to CIN1, CIN2 and CIN3), with a significant trend of increased methylation with lesion grade. We shortlisted a bigenic (hyaluronan synthase 1, HAS1 and ATPase phospholipid transporting 10A, ATP10A corresponding to cg03419058 and cg13944175 sites) marker set; r = 0.55, p < 0.0001. Validation of the four most discriminating genes (CA10, DPP10, FMN2 and HAS1) showed a significant correlation between methylation levels and disease progression (p-value < 2.2 × 10-16 , adjusted R2 = 0.952). Translational research of the identified genes to future clinical applications is warranted.

Challenges in Assessing the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Integrity and Interpretability of Clinical Trials.

Abstract-The COVID-19 pandemic has a global impact on the conduct of clinical trials of medical products. This article discusses implications of the COVID-19 pandemic on clinical research methodology aspects and provides points to consider to assess and mitigate the risk of seriously compromising the integrity and interpretability of clinical trials. The information in this article will support discussions that need to occur cross-functionally on an ongoing basis to "integrate all available knowledge from the ethical, the medical, and the methodological perspective into decision making." This article aims at facilitating: (i) risk assessments of the impact of the pandemic on trial integrity and interpretability; (ii) identification of the relevant data and information related to the impact of the pandemic on the trial that needs to be collected; (iii) short-term decision making impacting ongoing trial operations; (iv) ongoing monitoring of the trial conduct until completion, including the possible involvement of data monitoring committees, and adequately documenting all measures taken to secure trial integrity throughout and after the pandemic, and (v) proper analysis and interpretation of the eventual interim or final trial data.

Predictive Value of HPV Testing in Self-collected and Clinician-Collected Samples Compared with Cytology in Detecting High-grade Cervical Lesions.

BACKGROUND: Self-sampling has become an attractive proposition now that human papillomavirus (HPV) primary testing is being incorporated into cervical cancer screening programs worldwide. We compared predictive values of HPV testing based on self- and physician-collected samples, and cytology, in detecting high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN). METHODS: The Cervical And Self-Sample In Screening (CASSIS) study enrolled 1,217 women ages 16-70 years prior to scheduled colposcopies. Vaginal specimens were self-collected using the validated HerSwab device. Cervical specimens were collected by gynecologists. Specimens were tested for presence of high-risk HPV (hrHPV) by the Cobas 4800 HPV test. We estimated positive predictive values (PPV) and negative predictive values (NPV) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for a subset of women (n = 700) who underwent cervical biopsy and cytology at the actual CASSIS visit. RESULTS: hrHPV was detected in 329 women (47%) with HerSwab and in 327 (46.7%) with physician sampling. Respective values for HPV16/18 were 119 (17%) and 121 (17.3%). On histology, 134 women had CIN1, 49 had CIN2, 48 had CIN3, 5 had CIN2/CIN3, and 3 had cancers. PPVs for CIN2+ of any hrHPV were 28% (95% CI, 23.2-33.1) and 29.7% (95% CI, 24.8-34.9) for HerSwab and physician samples, respectively. Corresponding values for HPV16/18 were 43.7% (95% CI, 34.6-53.1) and 43.8% (95% CI, 34.8-53.1). PPV of cytology (ASC-US+) was 26.6% (95% CI, 21.6-32.0). Corresponding NPVs (same order as PPVs) were 96.4% (95% CI, 93.9-98.1), 97.8% (95% CI, 95.6-99), 90.9% (95% CI, 88.2-93.1), 91% (95% CI, 88.4-93.2), and 94.7% (95% CI, 91.8-96.8). CONCLUSIONS: Our results confirm that HPV self-sampling has comparable performance with a physician-collected sample in detecting cervical lesions. IMPACT: HPV self-sampling has the potential to increase coverage in cervical cancer screening.

Commentary on the EMA Reflection Paper on the use of extrapolation in the development of medicines for paediatrics.

Adopted guidelines reflect a harmonised European approach to a specific scientific issue and should reflect the most recent scientific knowledge. However, whilst EU regulations are mandatory for all member states and EU directives must be followed by national laws in line with the directive, EMA guidelines do not have legal force and alternative approaches may be taken, but these obviously require more justification. This new series of the BJCP, developed in collaboration with the EMA, aims to address this issue by providing an annotated version of some relevant EMA guidelines and regulatory documents by experts. Hopefully, this will help in promoting their diffusion and in opening a forum for discussion with our readers.

Adaptive designs in clinical trials: from scientific advice to marketing authorisation to the European Medicine Agency.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, experience on the application of adaptive designs in confirmatory clinical trials has accumulated. Although planning such trials comes at the cost of additional operational complexity, adaptive designs offer the benefit of flexibility to update trial design and objectives as data accrue. In 2007, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) provided guidance on confirmatory clinical trials with adaptive (or flexible) designs. In order to better understand how adaptive trials are implemented in practice and how they may impact medicine approval within the EMA centralised procedure, we followed on 59 medicines for which an adaptive clinical trial had been submitted to the EMA Scientific Advice (SA) and analysed previously in a dedicated EMA survey of scientific advice letters. We scrutinized in particular the submission of the corresponding medicines for a marketing authorisation application (MAA). We also discuss the current regulatory perspective as regards the implementation of adaptive designs in confirmatory clinical trials. METHODS: Using the internal EMA MAA database, the AdisInsight database and related trial registries, we analysed how many of these 59 trials actually started, the completion status, results, the time to trial start, the adaptive elements finally implemented after SA, their possible influence on the success of the trial and corresponding product approval. RESULTS: Overall 31 trials out of 59 (53%) were retrieved. Thirty of them (97%) have been started and 23 (74%) concluded. Nine of these trials (39% out of 23) demonstrated a significant treatment effect on their primary endpoint and 4 (17% out of 23) supported a marketing authorisation (MA). An additional two trials were stopped using pre-defined criteria for futility, efficiently identifying trials on which further resources should not be spent. Median time to trial start after SA letter was given by EMA was 5 months. In the investigated trial registries, at least 18 trial (58% of 31 retrieved trials) designs were implemented with adaptive elements, which were predominantly dose selection, sample size reassessment (SSR) and stopping for futility (SFF). Among the 11 completed trials including adaptive elements, 6 demonstrated a significant treatment effect on their primary endpoint (55%). CONCLUSIONS: Adaptive designs are now well established in the drug development landscape. If properly pre-planned, adaptations can play a key role in the success of some of these trials, for example to help successfully select the most promising dose regimens for phase II/III trials. Interim analyses can also enable stopping of trials for futility when they do not hold their promises. Type I error rate control, trial integrity and results consistency between the different stages of the analyses are fundamental aspects to be discussed thoroughly. Engaging early dialogue with regulators and implementing the scientific advice received is strongly recommended, since much experience in discussing adaptive designs and assessing their results has been accumulated.

Validation of a new HPV self-sampling device for cervical cancer screening: The Cervical and Self-Sample In Screening (CASSIS) study.

OBJECTIVE: We compared the self-sampling performance of the newly designed HerSwab™ device with a physician-collected cervical sample and another self-sample using the cobas® PCR Female swab for the detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) and cancer. METHODS: Women referred for colposcopy at McGill University affiliated hospital clinics collected two consecutive self-samples, one with HerSwab™ and one with cobas® swab, after receiving instructions. The order of sampling was randomized. The colposcopist then collected a cervical sample and conducted a colposcopic examination. Samples were tested for human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA. Sensitivity and specificity to detect CIN2+ and respective 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated to compare sampling approaches. The HPV testing agreement between samples was measured using the Kappa statistic. RESULTS: Of 1217 women enrolled, 1076 had complete results for HPV and cytology; 148 (13.8%) had CIN1, 147 (13.7%) had CIN2/3, and 5 (0.5%) had cancer. There was very good agreement between methods for HPV detection (HerSwab™ versus physician: kappa=0.84; cobas® swabs versus physician: kappa=0.81; HerSwab™ versus cobas® swabs: kappa=0.87). The sensitivity of HPV detection for CIN2+ was 87.6% (95%CI: 79.8-93.2) with self-sampling using HerSwab™, 88.6% (95%CI: 80.9-94.0) with self-sampling using the cobas® swab, and 92.4% (95%CI: 85.5-96.7) with physician sampling. Corresponding estimates of specificity were 58.1% (95%CI: 54.1-62.1), 55.0% (95%CI: 50.9-59.0) and 58.7% (95%CI: 54.6-62.6). Cytology (ASC-US or more severe) done on the physician-collected specimen was 80.2% (95%CI: 70.8-87.6) sensitive and 61.4% (95%CI: 57.2-65.5) specific for CIN2+. CONCLUSIONS: The HerSwab™ had good agreement with physician sampling in detecting HPV, and adequate performance in detecting high-grade lesions among women referred to colposcopy for abnormal cytology.

Development of Exon Skipping Therapies for Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy: A Critical Review and a Perspective on the Outstanding Issues.

Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) is a rare, severe, progressive muscle-wasting disease leading to disability and premature death. Patients lack the muscle membrane-stabilizing protein dystrophin. Antisense oligonucleotide (AON)-mediated exon skipping is a therapeutic approach that aims to induce production of partially functional dystrophins. Recently, an AON targeting exon 51 became the first of its class to be approved by the United States regulators [Food and Drug Administration (FDA)] for the treatment of DMD. A unique aspect of the exon-skipping approach for DMD is that, depending on the size and location of the mutation, different exons need to be skipped. This challenge raises a number of questions regarding the development and regulatory approval of those individual compounds. In this study, we present a perspective on those questions, following a European stakeholder meeting involving academics, regulators, and representatives from industry and patient organizations, and in the light of the most recent scientific and regulatory experience.

Extrapolation in the development of paediatric medicines: examples from approvals for biological treatments for paediatric chronic immune-mediated inflammatory diseases.

The European Union (EU) Paediatric Regulation requires that all new medicinal products applying for a marketing authorisation (MA) in the EU provide a paediatric investigation plan (PIP) covering a clinical and non-clinical trial programme relating to the use in the paediatric population, unless a waiver applies. Conducting trials in children is challenging on many levels, including ethical and practical issues, which may affect the availability of the clinical evidence. In scientifically justified cases, extrapolation of data from other populations can be an option to gather evidence supporting the benefit-risk assessment of the medicinal product for paediatric use. The European Medicines Agency (EMA) is working on providing a framework for extrapolation that is scientifically valid, reliable and adequate to support MA of medicines for children. It is expected that the extrapolation framework together with therapeutic area guidelines and individual case studies will support future PIPs. Extrapolation has already been employed in several paediatric development programmes including biological treatment for immune-mediated diseases. This article reviews extrapolation strategies from MA applications for products for the treatment of juvenile idiopathic arthritis, paediatric psoriasis and paediatric inflammatory bowel disease. It also provides a summary of extrapolation advice expressed in relevant EMA guidelines and initiatives supporting the use of alternative approaches in paediatric medicine development.

Stakeholder cooperation to overcome challenges in orphan medicine development: the example of Duchenne muscular dystrophy.

Duchenne muscular dystrophy is a rare, progressive, muscle-wasting disease leading to severe disability and premature death. Treatment is currently symptomatic, but several experimental therapies are in development. Implemented care standards, validated outcome measures correlating with clinical benefit, and comprehensive information about the natural history of the disease are essential for regulatory approval of any treatment. However, for Duchenne muscular dystrophy and other rare diseases, these requirements are not always in place when potential therapies enter the clinical trial phase. A cooperative effort of stakeholders in Duchenne muscular dystrophy-including representatives from patients' groups, academia, industry, and regulatory agencies-is aimed at addressing this shortfall by identifying strategies to overcome challenges, developing the tools needed, and collecting relevant data. An open and constructive dialogue among European stakeholders has positively affected development of treatments for Duchenne muscular dystrophy; this approach could serve as a paradigm for development of treatments for rare diseases in general.

Seeking harmony: estimands and sensitivity analyses for confirmatory clinical trials.

In October 2014, the Steering Committee of the International Conference on Harmonization endorsed the formation of an expert working group to develop an addendum to the International Conference on Harmonization E9 guideline ("Statistical Principles for Clinical Trials"). The addendum will focus on two topics involving randomized confirmatory clinical trials: estimands and sensitivity analyses. Both topics are motivated, in part, by the need to improve the precision with which scientific questions of interest are formulated and addressed by clinical trialists and regulators, specifically in the context of post-randomization events such as use of rescue medication or missing data resulting from dropouts. Given the importance of these topics for the statistical and medical community, we articulate the reasons for the planned addendum. The resulting "ICH E9/R1" guideline will include a framework for improved trial planning, conduct, analysis, and interpretation; a draft is expected to be ready for public comment in the second half of 2016.

On the need for increased rigour and care in the conduct and interpretation of network meta-analyses in drug development.

The rise over recent years in the use of network meta-analyses (NMAs) in clinical research and health economic analysis is little short of meteoric driven, in part, by a desire from decision makers to extend inferences beyond direct comparisons in controlled clinical trials. But is the increased use and reliance of NMAs justified? Do such analyses provide a reliable basis for the relative effectiveness assessment of medicines and, in turn, for critical decisions relating to healthcare access and provisioning? And can such analyses also be used earlier, as part of the evidence base for licensure? Despite several important publications highlighting inherently unverifiable assumptions underpinning NMAs, these assumptions and associated potential for serious bias are often overlooked in the reporting and interpretation of NMAs. A more cautious, and better informed, approach to the use and interpretation of NMAs in clinical research is warranted given the assumptions that sit behind such analyses.