The Stroke Hyperglycemia Insulin Network Effort (SHINE) trial: an adaptive trial design case study

BackgroundThe ‘Adaptive Designs Accelerating Promising Trials into Treatments (ADAPT-IT)’ project is a collaborative effort supported by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and United States Food & Drug Administration (FDA) to explore how adaptive clinical trial design might improve the evaluation of drugs and medical devices. ADAPT-IT uses the National Institute of Neurologic Disorders & Stroke-supported Neurological Emergencies Treatment Trials (NETT) network as a ‘laboratory’ in which to study the development of adaptive clinical trial designs in the confirmatory setting. The Stroke Hyperglycemia Insulin Network Effort (SHINE) trial was selected for funding by the NIH-NINDS at the start of ADAPT-IT and is currently an ongoing phase III trial of tight glucose control in hyperglycemic acute ischemic stroke patients. Within ADAPT-IT, a Bayesian adaptive Goldilocks trial design alternative was developed.MethodsThe SHINE design includes response adaptive randomization, a sample size re-estimation, and monitoring for early efficacy and futility according to a group sequential design. The Goldilocks design includes more frequent monitoring for predicted success or futility and a longitudinal model of the primary endpoint. Both trial designs were simulated and compared in terms of their mean sample size and power across a range of treatment effects and success rates for the control group.ResultsAs simulated, the SHINE design tends to have slightly higher power and the Goldilocks design has a lower mean sample size. Both designs were tuned to have approximately 80% power to detect a difference of 25% versus 32% between control and treatment, respectively. In this scenario, mean sample sizes are 1,114 and 979 for the SHINE and Goldilocks designs, respectively.ConclusionsTwo designs were brought forward, and both were evaluated, revised, and improved based on the input of all parties involved in the ADAPT-IT process. However, the SHINE investigators were tasked with choosing only a single design to implement and ultimately elected not to implement the Goldilocks design. The Goldilocks design will be retrospectively executed upon completion of SHINE to later compare the designs based on their use of patient resources, time, and conclusions in a real world setting.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT01369069 June 2011.

[1]  Koroshetz Wj,et al.  Tissue plasminogen activator for acute ischemic stroke. , 1996, The New England journal of medicine.

[2]  Kristine R Broglio,et al.  Not Too Big, Not Too Small: A Goldilocks Approach To Sample Size Selection , 2014, Journal of biopharmaceutical statistics.

[3]  Draft Guidance Guidance for Industry Adaptive Design Clinical Trials for Drugs and Biologics DRAFT GUIDANCE , 2010 .

[4]  Askiel Bruno,et al.  The Stroke Hyperglycemia Insulin Network Effort (SHINE) Trial Protocol: A Randomized, Blinded, Efficacy Trial of Standard vs. Intensive Hyperglycemia Management in Acute Stroke , 2014, International journal of stroke : official journal of the International Stroke Society.

[5]  R Core Team,et al.  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. , 2014 .

[6]  Rachael Fleurence,et al.  Do Bayesian adaptive trials offer advantages for comparative effectiveness research? Protocol for the RE-ADAPT study , 2013, Clinical trials.

[7]  Joseph P. Broderick,et al.  Tissue plasminogen activator for acute ischemic stroke. The National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke rt-PA Stroke Study Group. , 1995 .

[8]  Jason T Connor,et al.  The utility of Bayesian predictive probabilities for interim monitoring of clinical trials , 2014, Clinical trials.

[9]  G. Wassmer,et al.  Comments on the Draft Guidance on “Adaptive Design Clinical Trials for Drugs and Biologics” of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration , 2010, Journal of biopharmaceutical statistics.

[10]  D. Berry,et al.  An overview of the adaptive designs accelerating promising trials into treatments (ADAPT-IT) project. , 2012, Annals of emergency medicine.

[11]  W J Shih,et al.  Modifying the design of ongoing trials without unblinding. , 1998, Statistics in medicine.

[12]  Lisa V. Hampson,et al.  Group sequential tests for delayed responses (with discussion) , 2013 .

[13]  S. Julious,et al.  Influence of adaptive analysis on unnecessary patient recruitment: reanalysis of the RATPAC trial. , 2012, Annals of emergency medicine.