CITIES: Clinical trials with intercurrent events simulator.

Although clinical trials are often designed with randomization and well-controlled protocols, complications will inevitably arise in the presence of intercurrent events (ICEs) such as treatment discontinuation. These can lead to missing outcome data and possibly confounding causal inference when the missingness is a function of a latent stratification of patients defined by intermediate outcomes. The pharmaceutical industry has been focused on developing new methods that can yield pertinent causal inferences in trials with ICEs. However, it is difficult to compare the properties of different methods developed in this endeavor as real-life clinical trial data cannot be easily shared to provide benchmark data sets. Furthermore, different methods consider distinct assumptions for the underlying data-generating mechanisms, and simulation studies often are customized to specific situations or methods. We develop a novel, general simulation model and corresponding Shiny application in R for clinical trials with ICEs, aptly named the Clinical Trials with Intercurrent Events Simulator (CITIES). It is formulated under the Rubin Causal Model where the considered treatment effects account for ICEs in clinical trials with repeated measures. CITIES facilitates the effective generation of data that resemble real-life clinical trials with respect to their reported summary statistics, without requiring the use of the original trial data. We illustrate the utility of CITIES via two case studies involving real-life clinical trials that demonstrate how CITIES provides a comprehensive tool for practitioners in the pharmaceutical industry to compare methods for the analysis of clinical trials with ICEs on identical, benchmark settings that resemble real-life trials.

Defining Clinical Trial Estimands: A Practical Guide for Study Teams with Examples Based on a Psychiatric Disorder.

While the ICH E9(R1) Addendum on "Estimands and Sensitivity Analysis in Clinical Trials" was released in late 2019, the widespread implementation of defining and reporting estimands across clinical trials is still in progress and the engagement of non-statistical functions in this process is also in progress. Case studies are sought after, especially those with documented clinical and regulatory feedback. This paper describes an interdisciplinary process for implementing the estimand framework, devised by the Estimands and Missing Data Working Group (a group with clinical, statistical, and regulatory representation) of the International Society for CNS Clinical Trials and Methodology. This process is illustrated by specific examples using various types of hypothetical trials evaluating a treatment for major depressive disorder. Each of the estimand examples follows the same template and features all steps of the proposed process, including identifying the trial stakeholder(s), the decisions they need to make about the investigated treatment in their specific role and the questions that would support their decision making. Each of the five strategies for handling intercurrent events are addressed in at least one example; the featured endpoints are also diverse, including continuous, binary and time to event. Several examples are presented that include specifications for a potential trial design, key trial implementation elements needed to address the estimand, and main and sensitivity estimator specifications. Ultimately this paper highlights the need to incorporate multi-disciplinary collaborations into implementing the ICH E9(R1) framework.

Long-Term Safety and Efficacy of Fulranumab in Patients With Moderate-to-Severe Osteoarthritis Pain: A Phase II Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Extension Study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy of fulranumab in patients with knee or hip pain caused by moderate-to-severe chronic osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: In this phase II double-blind, placebo-controlled extension study, patients who were randomized in equal proportions to receive subcutaneous doses of either placebo or fulranumab (1 mg every 4 weeks, 3 mg every 8 weeks, 3 mg every 4 weeks, 6 mg every 8 weeks, or 10 mg every 8 weeks) in the 12-week double-blind efficacy phase and who completed this double-blind efficacy phase were eligible to continue the dosage throughout a 92-week double-blind extension phase, followed by a 24-week posttreatment follow-up period. Safety assessments included evaluation of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), pre-identified AEs of interest, and joint replacements. Efficacy assessments included changes from baseline to the end of the double-blind extension phase in scores on the patient's global assessment and the pain and physical function subscales of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index. RESULTS: Overall, 401 of the 423 patients who completed the 12-week double-blind efficacy phase entered the extension study. Long-term sustained improvements were observed in all efficacy parameters following fulranumab treatment (1 mg every 4 weeks, 3 mg every 4 weeks, and 10 mg every 8 weeks) as compared with placebo. Similar percentages of patients in both groups experienced TEAEs (88% taking placebo and 91% taking fulranumab; all phases). Across all fulranumab groups, arthralgia (21%) and OA (18%) (e.g., exacerbation of OA pain) were the most common TEAEs. The most common serious TEAEs were the requirement for knee (10%) and hip (7%) arthroplasty, with 80% occurring during the posttreatment follow-up period. Neurologic-related TEAEs (28%; all phases) were generally mild-to-moderate. Overall, 81 joint replacements were performed in 71 patients (8 [11%] receiving placebo and 63 [89%] receiving fulranumab); 15 patients (21%) had rapid progression of OA (RPOA). All cases of RPOA occurred in fulranumab-treated patients who were concurrently receiving nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs and occurred in joints with preexisting OA. CONCLUSION: Long-term treatment with fulranumab was generally well-tolerated and efficacious. RPOA was observed as a safety signal. Future studies are warranted to demonstrate whether the risk of RPOA can be reduced in patients taking fulranumab.

Efficacy, Safety, and Tolerability of Fulranumab as an Adjunctive Therapy in Patients With Inadequately Controlled, Moderate-to-Severe Chronic Low Back Pain: A Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled, Dose-ranging, Dose-loading Phase II Study.

PURPOSE: Fulranumab is an investigational, fully human recombinant monoclonal antibody (IgG2) that neutralizes the biological actions of human nerve growth factor. Low back pain is a common cause of noncancer chronic pain and represents one of the most significant socioeconomic health-related problems in developed countries. This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was conducted to evaluate the analgesic effect of fulranumab in patients with moderate-to-severe chronic low back pain. METHODS: Patients (aged 18-80 years) were randomized to receive subcutaneous injections every 4 weeks in 1 of 5 parallel treatment groups: placebo or fulranumab 1mg (1mgQ4wk), 3mg (3mgQ4wk), 3mg after a 6mg loading dose (6mgLD+3mgQ4wk), or 10mg (10mgQ4wk) every 4 weeks. FINDINGS: A total of 385 patients (median age, 53 years; women, 54%) received at least 1 injection of study medication. No statistically significant differences were observed in improvement of pain intensity scores between the fulranumab treatment regimens and the placebo group at week 12 (primary end point; mean [SD], placebo: -2.0 [2.17], 1mgQ4wk: -1.9 [2.14], 3mgQ4wk: -2.2 [1.89], 6mgLD+3mgQ4wk: -2.0 [1.72] and 10mgQ4wk: -2.1 [2.18]). Results for secondary efficacy parameters (change in the Oswestry Disability Index, Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form, and Patient Global Assessment scales) were consistent with the primary outcome. A placebo effect was observed; the overall percentage of patients with treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) was similar between the placebo (76%) and fulranumab treatment groups (77%-90%). Across all phases, the most common TEAEs in at least 10% of patients (combined fulranumab group vs placebo) were arthralgia (15% vs 12%), back pain (15% vs 18%), upper respiratory tract infection (15% vs 8%), paresthesia (14% vs 8%), diarrhea (12% vs 4%), headache (12% vs 8%), hypoesthesia (11% vs 5%), pain in extremity (11% vs 8%), sinusitis (10% vs 5%), and nasopharyngitis (10% vs 9%). Across all phases, neurologic TEAEs were less frequent in the placebo group (14%) versus the fulranumab treatment groups (25%). In the posttreatment phase, 8 patients had joint replacement operations, which were considered a result of normal progression of osteoarthritis. One case in the 10-mg group was determined to be rapid progession of osteoarthritis and was considered to be possibly related to study drug. IMPLICATIONS: Fulranumab did not demonstrate efficacy compared with placebo in patients with chronic low back pain but was generally well-tolerated. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00973024.

Efficacy, safety, and tolerability of fulranumab, an anti-nerve growth factor antibody, in the treatment of patients with moderate to severe osteoarthritis pain.

Nerve growth factor (NGF) is increased in chronic pain conditions. This study examined analgesic efficacy and safety of fulranumab, a fully human monoclonal anti-NGF antibody, in adults with chronic osteoarthritis pain. Patients (n=466, intent-to-treat) were randomized to receive, in addition to their current pain therapy, subcutaneous injections in 1 of 6 parallel treatment groups: placebo (n=78), fulranumab 1 mg (n=77) or 3 mg (n=79) every 4 weeks (Q4wk), 3 mg (n=76), 6 mg (n=78), or 10 mg (n=78) every 8 weeks (Q8wk). Primary efficacy results showed that fulranumab significantly reduced the average pain intensity score (P < or = 0.030) from baseline to week 12 compared with placebo in the 3mgQ4wk, 6mgQ8wk, and 10mgQ8wk groups. Secondary efficacy outcomes indicated that significant improvement occurred compared with placebo at week 12 on the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index subscales of pain, stiffness, and physical function (P < 0.040) across all fulranumab groups except 1mgQ4wk, on the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form subscales of pain intensity (P < or = 0.016) and pain interference (P < or = 0.030) in the 3mgQ4wk and 10mgQ8wk groups, and on the Patient Global Assessment score (P < or = 0.040) in the 3mgQ4wk, 6mgQ8wk, and 10mgQ8wk groups. The most common (> or = 5% of patients) treatment-emergent adverse events in overall fulranumab groups during the first 12weeks included paresthesia (7%), headache (5%), and nasopharyngitis (5%). Most neurologic-related treatment-emergent adverse events were mild or moderate and resolved at the end of week 12. Serious adverse events occurred in 3 patients, but they were not neurologically related and resolved before study completion. Fulranumab treatment resulted in statistically significant efficacy in pain measures and physical function versus placebo and was generally well tolerated.

Effect of topiramate monotherapy on height in newly diagnosed children with epilepsy.

We conducted a post hoc assessment of the effect of ≥6 months of topiramate monotherapy on height in pediatric patients with newly diagnosed partial-onset seizure. Data on height measured nonsystematically up to 4 years from two randomized, double-blind studies and their open-label extensions were combined and converted to z scores and percentiles by patient's sex and age. Height velocity values (centimeters per year) and the associated z scores were computed for each postbaseline year using normative data. Median height velocity (centimeters per year) values and the associated z scores for patients ages 6-9 years were, year 1: 4.7 (-0.91); year 2: 4.2 (-1.62); year 3: 4.5 (-1.87); and for patients ages 10-15 years were, year 1: 4.0 (-0.76); year 2: 2.8 (-1.34); year 3: 3.1 (-0.74). There was a significant correlation between height velocity z score and change from baseline in height z score (r = 0.94 [n = 117]; P < 0.0001). Patient's bicarbonate status (low was defined as two postbaseline serum bicarbonate values <20 mmol/L) and sex had no effect on height velocity. In both age groups, continued growth was observed; however, the growth rate was slower than expected compared with a matched normal population from years 1 to 2 and showed minimal recovery from years 2 to 3.

Cognitive effects of topiramate in migraine patients aged 12 through 17 years.

Neuropsychologic data are presented from a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter study with placebo, topiramate 50 mg/day, and topiramate 100 mg/day. The Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery (CANTAB) and cognitive adverse events were used to evaluate neurocognitive effects of topiramate. Topiramate 100 mg/day vs placebo was associated with slight statistically significant score increases, indicating slowing, from baseline vs placebo in three CANTAB measures: five-choice reaction time (P = 0.028), pattern recognition memory mean correct latency (P = 0.027), and rapid visual information processing mean latency (P = 0.040). No other patterns related to topiramate treatment were observed in measurements of learning, memory, and visual information processing, except for potential improvement with topiramate 100 mg/day vs placebo in spatial span total errors (accuracy test) (P = 0.040). The most common cognitive and neuropsychiatric adverse events with a higher incidence in the topiramate 50 and 100 mg/day groups vs placebo were anorexia (9% and 11% vs 3%), insomnia (9% and 3% vs 3%), fatigue (6% and 9% vs 6%), and dizziness (6% and 9% vs 0%). Thus, topiramate 100 mg/day was associated with modest increases in psychomotor reaction times. Learning, memory, and executive function were unchanged. The tolerability profile, including cognitive adverse events, appeared to be acceptable.

Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of topiramate for migraine prevention in pediatric subjects 12 to 17 years of age.

OBJECTIVE: Currently, no drugs are Food and Drug Administration-approved for migraine prophylaxis in pediatric patients. The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of topiramate for migraine prevention in adolescents. METHODS: Adolescents (12-17 years of age) with a >/=6-month history of migraine were assigned randomly to receive 16 weeks of daily treatment with topiramate (50 or 100 mg/day) or placebo. The primary efficacy measure was the percent reduction in monthly migraine attacks, with the use of the 48-hour rule, from the prospective baseline period to the last 12 weeks of the double-blind phase. The 48-hour rule defined a single migraine episode as all recurrences of migraine symptoms within 48 hours after onset. Several secondary efficacy measures were evaluated, including the reduction from baseline in the monthly migraine day rate and the 50% responder rate. Safety and tolerability were also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 29 (83%) of 35 subjects treated with topiramate at 50 mg/day, 30 (86%) of 35 subjects treated with topiramate at 100 mg/day, and 26 (79.0%) of 33 placebo-treated subjects completed double-blind treatment. Topiramate at 100 mg/day, but not 50 mg/day, resulted in a statistically significant reduction in the monthly migraine attack rate from baseline versus placebo (median: 72.2% vs 44.4%) during the last 12 weeks of double-blind treatment. Topiramate at 100 mg/day, but not 50 mg/day, also resulted in a statistically significant reduction in the monthly migraine day rate from baseline versus placebo. The responder rate favored topiramate at 100 mg/day (83% vs 45% for placebo). Upper respiratory tract infection, paresthesia, and dizziness occurred more commonly in the topiramate groups than in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: The 100 mg/day topiramate group demonstrated efficacy in the prevention of migraine in pediatric subjects. Overall, topiramate treatment was safe and well tolerated.

Premature ejaculation: results from a five-country European observational study.

OBJECTIVES: To characterize premature ejaculation (PE) in five European countries using intravaginal ejaculatory latency time (IELT) and the Premature Ejaculation Profile (PEP). METHODS: This 8-wk, multicenter, observational study enrolled men >or=18 yr of age and their female partners. Clinicians diagnosed PE using the DSM-IV-TR criteria and at least moderate, subject-reported, ejaculation-related personal distress or interpersonal difficulty. The PEP was administered at baseline and weeks 4 and 8. Partners measured IELT; the average stopwatch-measured IELT for each 4-wk period was calculated and compared with the man's screening-estimated IELT. Relationships between individual PEP measures and IELT were assessed with path analysis. RESULTS: PE was diagnosed in 201 of 1115 men. Findings were similar to those in a similarly conducted US study. Mean IELT was lower in the PE versus the non-PE group (3.3 vs. 10.0min, respectively), but substantial overlap was observed. Men with PE and their partners reported significantly worse control over ejaculation, ejaculation-related personal distress, satisfaction with sexual intercourse, and ejaculation-related interpersonal difficulty than men without PE and their partners. Path analysis showed that perceived control over ejaculation had a significant effect on ejaculation-related personal distress and satisfaction with sexual intercourse; IELT had an effect on control over ejaculation, no direct effect on satisfaction with sexual intercourse, and a small direct effect on ejaculation-related personal distress. CONCLUSIONS: No major cultural differences existed between EU and US men with and without PE and their female partners. These results emphasize the importance of the PEP measures, especially perceived control over ejaculation, in characterizing PE.

Estimating mean hospital cost as a function of length of stay and patient characteristics.

Statistical models have been used to assess the influence of clinical and demographic factors on hospital charge and length of stay (LOS). Hospital costs constitute a significant proportion of overall expenditure in health care. With escalating costs, knowing the correlates of LOS and in-hospital cost is important for decisions on allocating resources. However, hospital charge and LOS are correlated. We describe two regression models that permit estimation of mean charges as a function of patient hospital stay and adjust for the influence of patient characteristics and treatment procedures on LOS and charge. In the first model, the mean charge over a specified duration is a weighted average of the expected cumulative charge, with weighting determined by the distribution of LOS. The second model for LOS and charge explicitly accounts for their correlation and yields estimates of the average charge per average LOS. The methods are applied to assess mean charges and mean charge per day by cardiac procedure in a cohort of patients hospitalized for acute myocardial infarction, while adjusting for the impact of patient demographic and clinical factors on LOS and charge. For relatively short hospital stays, and when only total hospital charges are available, these models provide a flexible approach to estimating summary measures on resource use while controlling for the effects of covariates on LOS and charge.