Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Advanced Methods for Dose and Regimen Finding During Drug Development: Summary of the EMA/EFPIA Workshop on Dose Finding (London 4-5 December 2014).
Musuamba, F T; Manolis, E; Holford, N; Cheung, Sya; Friberg, L E; Ogungbenro, K; Posch, M; Yates, Jwt; Berry, S; Thomas, N; Corriol-Rohou, S; Bornkamp, B; Bretz, F; Hooker, A C; Van der Graaf, P H; Standing, J F; Hay, J; Cole, S; Gigante, V; Karlsson, K; Dumortier, T; Benda, N; Serone, F; Das, S; Brochot, A; Ehmann, F; Hemmings, R; Rusten, I Skottheim.
Afiliação
  • Musuamba FT; EMA Modelling and Simulation Working Group, London, UK.
  • Manolis E; Federal Agency for Medicines and Health Products, Brussels, Belgium.
  • Holford N; UMR850 INSERM, Université de Limoges, Limoges, France.
  • Cheung S; EMA Modelling and Simulation Working Group, London, UK.
  • Friberg LE; European Medicines Agency, London, UK.
  • Ogungbenro K; Department of Pharmacology & Clinical Pharmacology, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
  • Posch M; AstraZeneca UK Limited, London, UK.
  • Yates J; Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
  • Berry S; Manchester University, Manchester, UK.
  • Thomas N; Center for Medical Statistics, Informatics and Intelligent Systems, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
  • Corriol-Rohou S; AstraZeneca UK Limited, London, UK.
  • Bornkamp B; Berry consultants, Austin, Texas, USA.
  • Bretz F; Pfizer, London, UK.
  • Hooker AC; AstraZeneca UK Limited, London, UK.
  • Van der Graaf PH; Novartis, London, UK.
  • Standing JF; Center for Medical Statistics, Informatics and Intelligent Systems, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
  • Hay J; Novartis, London, UK.
  • Cole S; Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
  • Gigante V; Leiden Academic Centre for Drug Research, Leiden, The Netherlands.
  • Karlsson K; Certara QSP, Canterbury, UK.
  • Dumortier T; EMA Modelling and Simulation Working Group, London, UK.
  • Benda N; University College London, London, UK.
  • Serone F; EMA Modelling and Simulation Working Group, London, UK.
  • Das S; Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency, London, UK.
  • Brochot A; EMA Modelling and Simulation Working Group, London, UK.
  • Ehmann F; Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency, London, UK.
  • Hemmings R; EMA Modelling and Simulation Working Group, London, UK.
  • Rusten IS; Agenzia Italiana del Farmaco, Roma, Italy.
CPT Pharmacometrics Syst Pharmacol ; 6(7): 418-429, 2017 07.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28722322
Inadequate dose selection for confirmatory trials is currently still one of the most challenging issues in drug development, as illustrated by high rates of late-stage attritions in clinical development and postmarketing commitments required by regulatory institutions. In an effort to shift the current paradigm in dose and regimen selection and highlight the availability and usefulness of well-established and regulatory-acceptable methods, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) in collaboration with the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries Association (EFPIA) hosted a multistakeholder workshop on dose finding (London 4-5 December 2014). Some methodologies that could constitute a toolkit for drug developers and regulators were presented. These methods are described in the present report: they include five advanced methods for data analysis (empirical regression models, pharmacometrics models, quantitative systems pharmacology models, MCP-Mod, and model averaging) and three methods for study design optimization (Fisher information matrix (FIM)-based methods, clinical trial simulations, and adaptive studies). Pairwise comparisons were also discussed during the workshop; however, mostly for historical reasons. This paper discusses the added value and limitations of these methods as well as challenges for their implementation. Some applications in different therapeutic areas are also summarized, in line with the discussions at the workshop. There was agreement at the workshop on the fact that selection of dose for phase III is an estimation problem and should not be addressed via hypothesis testing. Dose selection for phase III trials should be informed by well-designed dose-finding studies; however, the specific choice of method(s) will depend on several aspects and it is not possible to recommend a generalized decision tree. There are many valuable methods available, the methods are not mutually exclusive, and they should be used in conjunction to ensure a scientifically rigorous understanding of the dosing rationale.
Assuntos

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Relação Dose-Resposta a Droga / Descoberta de Drogas / Modelos Teóricos Tipo de estudo: Diagnostic_studies / Prognostic_studies Limite: Animals / Humans Idioma: En Revista: CPT Pharmacometrics Syst Pharmacol Ano de publicação: 2017 Tipo de documento: Article País de publicação: Estados Unidos

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Relação Dose-Resposta a Droga / Descoberta de Drogas / Modelos Teóricos Tipo de estudo: Diagnostic_studies / Prognostic_studies Limite: Animals / Humans Idioma: En Revista: CPT Pharmacometrics Syst Pharmacol Ano de publicação: 2017 Tipo de documento: Article País de publicação: Estados Unidos