Bayesian Phase II optimization for time-to-event data based on historical information

After exploratory drug development, companies face the decision whether to initiate confirmatory trials based on limited efficacy information. This proof-of-concept decision is typically performed after a Phase II trial studying a novel treatment versus either placebo or an active comparator. The article aims to optimize the design of such a proof-of-concept trial with respect to decision making. We incorporate historical information and develop pre-specified decision criteria accounting for the uncertainty of the observed treatment effect. We optimize these criteria based on sensitivity and specificity, given the historical information. Specifically, time-to-event data are considered in a randomized 2-arm trial with additional prior information on the control treatment. The proof-of-concept criterion uses treatment effect size, rather than significance. Criteria are defined on the posterior distribution of the hazard ratio given the Phase II data and the historical control information. Event times are exponentially modeled within groups, allowing for group-specific conjugate prior-to-posterior calculation. While a non-informative prior is placed on the investigational treatment, the control prior is constructed via the meta-analytic-predictive approach. The design parameters including sample size and allocation ratio are then optimized, maximizing the probability of taking the right decision. The approach is illustrated with an example in lung cancer.

[1]  Meinhard Kieser,et al.  Assessment of clinical relevance by considering point estimates and associated confidence intervals , 2005 .

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

[3]  M. Parmar,et al.  Extracting summary statistics to perform meta-analyses of the published literature for survival endpoints. , 1998, Statistics in medicine.

[4]  Meinhard Kieser,et al.  Utility‐based optimization of phase II/III programs , 2016, Statistics in medicine.

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

[6]  James Matcham,et al.  Decision‐making in early clinical drug development , 2016, Pharmaceutical statistics.

[7]  Frank Bretz,et al.  Predictive probability of success in clinical drug development , 2013 .

[8]  Yue Shentu,et al.  Early Clinical Development Planning via Biomarkers, Clinical Endpoints, and Simulation , 2015, Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science.

[9]  Dimitris Mavridis,et al.  Planning future studies based on the precision of network meta‐analysis results , 2016, Statistics in medicine.

[10]  Meinhard Kieser,et al.  Sample size planning for phase II trials based on success probabilities for phase III , 2015, Pharmaceutical statistics.

[11]  Bartha M Knoppers,et al.  Data Sharing - Is the Juice Worth the Squeeze? , 2016, The New England journal of medicine.

[12]  John Whitehead,et al.  Bayesian methods for setting sample sizes and choosing allocation ratios in phase II clinical trials with time‐to‐event endpoints , 2015, Statistics in medicine.

[13]  Yan Sun,et al.  Vandetanib plus docetaxel versus docetaxel as second-line treatment for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (ZODIAC): a double-blind, randomised, phase 3 trial. , 2010, The Lancet. Oncology.

[14]  Andreas Sashegyi,et al.  Ramucirumab plus docetaxel versus placebo plus docetaxel for second-line treatment of stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer after disease progression on platinum-based therapy (REVEL): a multicentre, double-blind, randomised phase 3 trial , 2014, The Lancet.

[15]  Rolf Kaiser,et al.  Docetaxel plus nintedanib versus docetaxel plus placebo in patients with previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer (LUME-Lung 1): a phase 3, double-blind, randomised controlled trial. , 2014, The Lancet. Oncology.

[16]  Jill Hayden,et al.  Seven items were identified for inclusion when reporting a Bayesian analysis of a clinical study. , 2005, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[17]  J. Klein,et al.  Statistical Models Based On Counting Process , 1994 .

[18]  S J Pocock,et al.  The combination of randomized and historical controls in clinical trials. , 1976, Journal of chronic diseases.

[19]  Jerald F. Lawless,et al.  Statistical Models and Methods for Lifetime Data: Lawless/Statistical , 2002 .

[20]  D. Spiegelhalter,et al.  Summarizing historical information on controls in clinical trials , 2010, Clinical trials.

[21]  Bruno Lecoutre,et al.  Assessment and monitoring in clinical trials when survival curves have distinct shapes: a Bayesian approach with Weibull modelling , 2002, Statistics in medicine.

[22]  Ram C Tiwari,et al.  Bayesian approach to non-inferiority trials for normal means , 2016, Statistical methods in medical research.

[23]  P. Müller,et al.  Determining the Effective Sample Size of a Parametric Prior , 2008, Biometrics.

[24]  Gordon Johnston,et al.  Statistical Models and Methods for Lifetime Data , 2003, Technometrics.

[25]  Andrew P Grieve,et al.  Idle thoughts of a ‘well‐calibrated’ Bayesian in clinical drug development , 2016, Pharmaceutical statistics.

[26]  Ying Yuan,et al.  MIDAS: a practical Bayesian design for platform trials with molecularly targeted agents. , 2016, Statistics in medicine.

[27]  Anthony O'Hagan,et al.  Robust meta‐analytic‐predictive priors in clinical trials with historical control information , 2014, Biometrics.

[28]  Roland Fisch,et al.  Bayesian Design of Proof-of-Concept Trials , 2015, Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science.

[29]  Heiko Götte,et al.  Improving Probabilities of Correct Interim Decision in Population Enrichment Designs , 2015, Journal of biopharmaceutical statistics.

[30]  Kristian Thorlund,et al.  Why the findings of published multiple treatment comparison meta-analyses of biologic treatments for rheumatoid arthritis are different: an overview of recurrent methodological shortcomings , 2012, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[31]  D. Spiegelhalter,et al.  Monitoring clinical trials: conditional or predictive power? , 1986, Controlled clinical trials.

[32]  Matteo Cellamare,et al.  A randomized two‐stage design for phase II clinical trials based on a Bayesian predictive approach , 2015, Statistics in medicine.

[33]  Adrian F. M. Smith,et al.  Sampling-Based Approaches to Calculating Marginal Densities , 1990 .

[34]  J Whitehead,et al.  Designing phase II studies in the context of a programme of clinical research. , 1985, Biometrics.

[35]  Edward S. Kim,et al.  Gefitinib versus docetaxel in previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer (INTEREST): a randomised phase III trial , 2008, The Lancet.

[36]  Peter F Thall,et al.  Monitoring event times in early phase clinical trials: some practical issues , 2005, Clinical trials.

[37]  Fang Chen,et al.  Use of historical control data for assessing treatment effects in clinical trials , 2014, Pharmaceutical statistics.

[38]  Michael Hay,et al.  Clinical development success rates for investigational drugs , 2014, Nature Biotechnology.

[39]  Heinz Schmidli,et al.  On the Use of Co-Data in Clinical Trials , 2016 .

[40]  R&D productivity rides again? , 2015, Pharmaceutical statistics.

[41]  Daniel F Heitjan,et al.  Real-time prediction of clinical trial enrollment and event counts: A review. , 2015, Contemporary clinical trials.

[42]  Heinz Schmidli,et al.  A practical guide to Bayesian group sequential designs , 2014, Pharmaceutical statistics.

[43]  Kevin J Carroll,et al.  Decision Making from Phase II to Phase III and the Probability of Success: Reassured by “Assurance”? , 2013, Journal of biopharmaceutical statistics.

[44]  Phil Woodward,et al.  Advantages of a wholly Bayesian approach to assessing efficacy in early drug development: a case study , 2015, Pharmaceutical statistics.

[45]  Satoshi Morita,et al.  Bayesian adaptive patient enrollment restriction to identify a sensitive subpopulation using a continuous biomarker in a randomized phase 2 trial , 2016, Pharmaceutical statistics.

[46]  P. Grambsch Survival and Event History Analysis: A Process Point of View by AALEN, O. O., BORGAN, O., and GJESSING, H. K. , 2009 .