Estimands in hematologic oncology trials

The estimand framework included in the addendum to the ICH E9 guideline facilitates discussions to ensure alignment between the key question of interest, the analysis, and interpretation. Therapeutic knowledge and drug mechanism play a crucial role in determining the strategy and defining the estimand for clinical trial designs. Clinical trials in patients with hematological malignancies often present unique challenges for trial design due to complexity of treatment options and existence of potential curative but highly risky procedures, for example, stem cell transplant or treatment sequence across different phases (induction, consolidation, maintenance). Here, we illustrate how to apply the estimand framework in hematological clinical trials and how the estimand framework can address potential difficulties in trial result interpretation. This paper is a result of a cross-industry collaboration to connect the International Conference on Harmonisation (ICH) E9 addendum concepts to applications. Three randomized phase 3 trials will be used to consider common challenges including intercurrent events in hematologic oncology trials to illustrate different scientific questions and the consequences of the estimand choice for trial design, data collection, analysis, and interpretation. Template language for describing estimand in both study protocols and statistical analysis plans is suggested for statisticians' reference.

[1]  D. Hose,et al.  Rationale and design of the German-speaking myeloma multicenter group (GMMG) trial HD6: a randomized phase III trial on the effect of elotuzumab in VRD induction/consolidation and lenalidomide maintenance in patients with newly diagnosed myeloma , 2019, BMC Cancer.

[2]  D. Scharfstein A constructive critique of the draft ICH E9 Addendum , 2019, Clinical trials.

[3]  Matthias Briel,et al.  Inconsistent Definitions for Intention-To-Treat in Relation to Missing Outcome Data: Systematic Review of the Methods Literature , 2012, PloS one.

[4]  Richard Pazdur,et al.  End points and United States Food and Drug Administration approval of oncology drugs. , 2003, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[5]  Norbert Benda,et al.  Choosing Appropriate Estimands in Clinical Trials , 2015, Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science.

[6]  L. Ellis,et al.  American Society of Clinical Oncology perspective: Raising the bar for clinical trials by defining clinically meaningful outcomes. , 2014, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[7]  K. Rufibach,et al.  Assessing the Impact of COVID-19 on the Clinical Trial Objective and Analysis of Oncology Clinical Trials—Application of the Estimand Framework , 2020, Statistics in biopharmaceutical research.

[8]  Thomas Permutt,et al.  Do Covariates Change the Estimand? , 2020, Statistics in Biopharmaceutical Research.

[9]  Norbert Benda,et al.  Disentangling estimands and the intention‐to‐treat principle , 2017, Pharmaceutical statistics.

[10]  W. Klapper,et al.  Obinutuzumab for the First‐Line Treatment of Follicular Lymphoma , 2017, The New England journal of medicine.

[11]  S. Ruberg,et al.  Estimands in clinical trials – broadening the perspective , 2017, Statistics in medicine.

[12]  David Dunson,et al.  Genetic heterogeneity of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma , 2013, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[13]  Daniel L Gillen,et al.  Estimation of treatment effect under non‐proportional hazards and conditionally independent censoring , 2012, Statistics in medicine.

[14]  Keith R Abrams,et al.  Adjusting Survival Time Estimates to Account for Treatment Switching in Randomized Controlled Trials—an Economic Evaluation Context , 2014, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[15]  Yanning Liu Sensitivity analyses for informative censoring in survival data: A trial example , 2017, Journal of biopharmaceutical statistics.

[16]  L. Sharples,et al.  Nonproportional Hazards for Time-to-Event Outcomes in Clinical Trials: JACC Review Topic of the Week. , 2019, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[17]  Kaspar Rufibach,et al.  Treatment effect quantification for time‐to‐event endpoints–Estimands, analysis strategies, and beyond , 2017, Pharmaceutical statistics.

[18]  B. Smith,et al.  Meaningful endpoints for therapies approved for hematologic malignancies , 2017, Cancer.

[19]  Björn Holzhauer,et al.  Choice of estimand and analysis methods in diabetes trials with rescue medication , 2015, Pharmaceutical statistics.

[20]  F. Bretz,et al.  Estimands and the Patient Journey: Addressing the Right Question in Oncology Clinical Trials. , 2019, JCO precision oncology.

[21]  D. Mehrotra,et al.  Seeking harmony: estimands and sensitivity analyses for confirmatory clinical trials , 2016, Clinical trials.