Design of paediatric trials with benefit-risk endpoints using a composite score of adverse events of interest (AEI) and win-statistics.

A fundamental problem in the regulatory evaluation of a therapy is assessing whether the benefit outweighs the associated risks. This work proposes designing a trial that assesses a composite endpoint consisting of benefit and risk, hence, making the core of the design of the study, to assess benefit and risk. The proposed benefit risk measure consists of efficacy measure(s) and a risk measure that is based on a composite score obtained from pre-defined adverse events of interest (AEI). This composite score incorporates full aspects of adverse events of interest (i.e. the incidence, severity, and duration of the events). We call this newly proposed score the AEI composite score. After specifying the priorities between the components of the composite endpoint, a win-statistic (i.e. win ratio, win odds, or net benefit) is used to assess the difference between treatments in this composite endpoint. The power and sample size requirements of such a trial design are explored via simulation. Finally, using Dupixent published adult study results, we show how we can design a paediatric trial where the primary outcome is a composite of prioritized outcomes consisting of efficacy endpoints and the AEI composite score endpoint. The resulting trial design can potentially substantially reduce sample size compared to a trial designed to assess the co-primary efficacy endpoints, therefore it may address the challenge of slow enrollment and patient availability for paediatric studies.

[1]  D. Hoaglin,et al.  Win statistics (win ratio, win odds, and net benefit) can complement one another to show the strength of the treatment effect on time‐to‐event outcomes , 2022, Pharmaceutical statistics.

[2]  J. Massaro,et al.  Calculating power for the Finkelstein and Schoenfeld test statistic for a composite endpoint with two components , 2022, Statistics in medicine.

[3]  J. Ganju,et al.  Sample size formula for a win ratio endpoint , 2022, Statistics in medicine.

[4]  L. Mao,et al.  On restricted mean time in favor of treatment , 2021, Biometrics.

[5]  G. Koch,et al.  Power and sample size calculation for the win odds test: application to an ordinal endpoint in COVID-19 trials , 2021, Journal of biopharmaceutical statistics.

[6]  KyungMann Kim,et al.  Sample size formula for general win ratio analysis , 2021, Biometrics.

[7]  D. Hoaglin,et al.  Adjusting win statistics for dependent censoring , 2020, Pharmaceutical statistics.

[8]  S. Pocock,et al.  The win ratio approach for composite endpoints: practical guidance based on previous experience. , 2020, European heart journal.

[9]  Fengchun Zhang,et al.  Are immune-related adverse events associated with the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors in patients with cancer? A systematic review and meta-analysis , 2020, BMC Medicine.

[10]  D. Hoaglin,et al.  The Win Ratio: On Interpretation and Handling of Ties , 2019, Statistics in Biopharmaceutical Research.

[11]  John D. Davis,et al.  Efficacy and Safety of Dupilumab in Adolescents With Uncontrolled Moderate to Severe Atopic Dermatitis , 2019, JAMA dermatology.

[12]  G. Molenberghs,et al.  Generalized pairwise comparison methods to analyze (non)prioritized composite endpoints , 2019, Statistics in medicine.

[13]  F. Bretz,et al.  Estimands and Their Role in Clinical Trials , 2017 .

[14]  R. Bender,et al.  Biometrical issues in the analysis of adverse events within the benefit assessment of drugs , 2016, Pharmaceutical statistics.

[15]  S. Cosgrove,et al.  Desirability of Outcome Ranking (DOOR) and Response Adjusted for Duration of Antibiotic Risk (RADAR). , 2015, Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America.

[16]  S. Pocock,et al.  The win ratio: a new approach to the analysis of composite endpoints in clinical trials based on clinical priorities , 2011, European heart journal.

[17]  M. Buyse Generalized pairwise comparisons of prioritized outcomes in the two‐sample problem , 2010, Statistics in medicine.

[18]  R. Tamura,et al.  Global benefit–risk assessment in designing clinical trials and some statistical considerations of the method , 2008, Pharmaceutical statistics.

[19]  C Chuang-Stein,et al.  A new proposal for benefit-less-risk analysis in clinical trials. , 1994, Controlled clinical trials.