A Quantitative Process for Enhancing End of Phase 2 Decisions

The objectives of the phase 2 stage in a drug development program are to evaluate the safety and tolerability of different doses, select a promising dose range, and look for early signs of activity. At the end of phase 2, a decision to initiate phase 3 studies is made that involves the commitment of considerable resources. This multifactorial decision, generally made by balancing the current condition of a development organization's portfolio, the future cost of development, the competitive landscape, and the expected safety and efficacy benefits of a new therapy, needs to be a good one. In this article, we present a practical quantitative process that has been implemented for drugs entering phase 2 at Amgen Ltd. to ensure a consistent and explicit evidence-based approach is used to contribute to decisions for new drug candidates. Broadly following this process will also help statisticians increase their strategic influence in drug development programs. The process is illustrated using an example from the pancreatic cancer indication. Embedded within the process is a predominantly Bayesian approach to predicting the probability of efficacy success in a future (frequentist) phase 3 program.

[1]  J. Zarocostas Non-communicable diseases must have greater priority, says WHO , 2009, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[2]  J. DiMasi,et al.  Trends in Risks Associated With New Drug Development: Success Rates for Investigational Drugs , 2010, Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics.

[3]  D. Moher,et al.  Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. , 2010, International journal of surgery.

[4]  Nigel Stallard,et al.  Decision‐making in a phase II clinical trial: a new approach combining Bayesian and frequentist concepts , 2005 .

[5]  Using short‐term evidence to predict six‐month outcomes in clinical trials of signs and symptoms in rheumatoid arthritis , 2009, Pharmaceutical statistics.

[6]  I. Kola,et al.  Can the pharmaceutical industry reduce attrition rates? , 2004, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[7]  Nicky J Welton,et al.  Enhanced secondary analysis of survival data: reconstructing the data from published Kaplan-Meier survival curves , 2012, BMC Medical Research Methodology.

[8]  Li Shi,et al.  Predictive power to assist phase 3 go/no go decision based on phase 2 data on a different endpoint , 2012, Statistics in medicine.

[9]  Anthony O'Hagan,et al.  Assurance in clinical trial design , 2005 .

[10]  Michele Tarsilla Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions , 2010, Journal of MultiDisciplinary Evaluation.

[11]  J. Higgins Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration , 2011 .

[12]  David R. Jones,et al.  How vague is vague? A simulation study of the impact of the use of vague prior distributions in MCMC using WinBUGS , 2005, Statistics in medicine.

[13]  D J Spiegelhalter,et al.  Applying Bayesian ideas in drug development and clinical trials. , 1993, Statistics in medicine.

[14]  D. Spiegelhalter,et al.  Disease Mapping With WinBUGS and MLwiN, Bayesian Approaches to Clinical Trials and Health Care Evaluation , 2004 .

[15]  J. Arrowsmith Trial watch: Phase II failures: 2008–2010 , 2011, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[16]  M. Sydes,et al.  Practical methods for incorporating summary time-to-event data into meta-analysis , 2007, Trials.

[17]  C Chuang-Stein,et al.  Discounting phase 2 results when planning phase 3 clinical trials , 2012, Pharmaceutical statistics.

[18]  J. Arrowsmith Trial watch: Phase III and submission failures: 2007–2010 , 2011, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[19]  Daniel J Sargent,et al.  Disease-free survival versus overall survival as a primary end point for adjuvant colon cancer studies: individual patient data from 20,898 patients on 18 randomized trials. , 2004, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[20]  Charles C. Persinger,et al.  How to improve R&D productivity: the pharmaceutical industry's grand challenge , 2010, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[21]  Anthony O'Hagan,et al.  The Rheumatoid Arthritis Drug Development Model: a case study in Bayesian clinical trial simulation , 2009, Pharmaceutical statistics.

[22]  M. A. Best Bayesian Approaches to Clinical Trials and Health‐Care Evaluation , 2005 .

[23]  D. Moher,et al.  Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement , 2009, BMJ.

[24]  D. Moher,et al.  Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. , 2010, International journal of surgery.

[25]  T. Płusa The European Medicines Agency , 2012 .