Cargando…
Adaptive design clinical trials: a review of the literature and ClinicalTrials.gov
OBJECTIVES: This review investigates characteristics of implemented adaptive design clinical trials and provides examples of regulatory experience with such trials. DESIGN: Review of adaptive design clinical trials in EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Registry of Controlled Clinical Trials, Web of Science an...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5829673/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29440155 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-018320 |
_version_ | 1783302856921579520 |
---|---|
author | Bothwell, Laura E Avorn, Jerry Khan, Nazleen F Kesselheim, Aaron S |
author_facet | Bothwell, Laura E Avorn, Jerry Khan, Nazleen F Kesselheim, Aaron S |
author_sort | Bothwell, Laura E |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: This review investigates characteristics of implemented adaptive design clinical trials and provides examples of regulatory experience with such trials. DESIGN: Review of adaptive design clinical trials in EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Registry of Controlled Clinical Trials, Web of Science and ClinicalTrials.gov. Phase I and seamless Phase I/II trials were excluded. Variables extracted from trials included basic study characteristics, adaptive design features, size and use of independent data monitoring committees (DMCs) and blinded interim analyses. We also examined use of the adaptive trials in new drug submissions to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medicines Agency (EMA) and recorded regulators’ experiences with adaptive designs. RESULTS: 142 studies met inclusion criteria. There has been a recent growth in publicly reported use of adaptive designs among researchers around the world. The most frequently appearing types of adaptations were seamless Phase II/III (57%), group sequential (21%), biomarker adaptive (20%), and adaptive dose-finding designs (16%). About one-third (32%) of trials reported an independent DMC, while 6% reported blinded interim analysis. We found that 9% of adaptive trials were used for FDA product approval consideration, and 12% were used for EMA product approval consideration. International regulators had mixed experiences with adaptive trials. Many product applications with adaptive trials had extensive correspondence between drug sponsors and regulators regarding the adaptive designs, in some cases with regulators requiring revisions or alterations to research designs. CONCLUSIONS: Wider use of adaptive designs will necessitate new drug application sponsors to engage with regulatory scientists during planning and conduct of the trials. Investigators need to more consistently report protections intended to preserve confidentiality and minimise potential operational bias during interim analysis. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5829673 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-58296732018-03-01 Adaptive design clinical trials: a review of the literature and ClinicalTrials.gov Bothwell, Laura E Avorn, Jerry Khan, Nazleen F Kesselheim, Aaron S BMJ Open Research Methods OBJECTIVES: This review investigates characteristics of implemented adaptive design clinical trials and provides examples of regulatory experience with such trials. DESIGN: Review of adaptive design clinical trials in EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Registry of Controlled Clinical Trials, Web of Science and ClinicalTrials.gov. Phase I and seamless Phase I/II trials were excluded. Variables extracted from trials included basic study characteristics, adaptive design features, size and use of independent data monitoring committees (DMCs) and blinded interim analyses. We also examined use of the adaptive trials in new drug submissions to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medicines Agency (EMA) and recorded regulators’ experiences with adaptive designs. RESULTS: 142 studies met inclusion criteria. There has been a recent growth in publicly reported use of adaptive designs among researchers around the world. The most frequently appearing types of adaptations were seamless Phase II/III (57%), group sequential (21%), biomarker adaptive (20%), and adaptive dose-finding designs (16%). About one-third (32%) of trials reported an independent DMC, while 6% reported blinded interim analysis. We found that 9% of adaptive trials were used for FDA product approval consideration, and 12% were used for EMA product approval consideration. International regulators had mixed experiences with adaptive trials. Many product applications with adaptive trials had extensive correspondence between drug sponsors and regulators regarding the adaptive designs, in some cases with regulators requiring revisions or alterations to research designs. CONCLUSIONS: Wider use of adaptive designs will necessitate new drug application sponsors to engage with regulatory scientists during planning and conduct of the trials. Investigators need to more consistently report protections intended to preserve confidentiality and minimise potential operational bias during interim analysis. BMJ Publishing Group 2018-02-10 /pmc/articles/PMC5829673/ /pubmed/29440155 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-018320 Text en © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted. This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ |
spellingShingle | Research Methods Bothwell, Laura E Avorn, Jerry Khan, Nazleen F Kesselheim, Aaron S Adaptive design clinical trials: a review of the literature and ClinicalTrials.gov |
title | Adaptive design clinical trials: a review of the literature and ClinicalTrials.gov |
title_full | Adaptive design clinical trials: a review of the literature and ClinicalTrials.gov |
title_fullStr | Adaptive design clinical trials: a review of the literature and ClinicalTrials.gov |
title_full_unstemmed | Adaptive design clinical trials: a review of the literature and ClinicalTrials.gov |
title_short | Adaptive design clinical trials: a review of the literature and ClinicalTrials.gov |
title_sort | adaptive design clinical trials: a review of the literature and clinicaltrials.gov |
topic | Research Methods |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5829673/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29440155 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-018320 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT bothwelllaurae adaptivedesignclinicaltrialsareviewoftheliteratureandclinicaltrialsgov AT avornjerry adaptivedesignclinicaltrialsareviewoftheliteratureandclinicaltrialsgov AT khannazleenf adaptivedesignclinicaltrialsareviewoftheliteratureandclinicaltrialsgov AT kesselheimaarons adaptivedesignclinicaltrialsareviewoftheliteratureandclinicaltrialsgov |