Bayesian, Utility-Based, Adaptive Enrichment Designs with Frequentist Error Control

Our improving understanding of the biology underlying various diseases has reinforced the idea that many diseases previously considered homogeneous are in fact heterogeneous collections with different prognoses, pathologies, and causal mechanisms. To this end, the biomedical field has begun to focus on developing targeted therapies: therapies aimed at treating only a subset of the population with a given disease (often derived by the molecular pathology of the disease). However, characterizing these subsets has been a challenge: Hundreds of patients may be required to effectively characterize these subsets. Often information on this many patients is not available until well into large-scale trials. In this chapter we discuss adaptive enrichment designs: clinical trial designs that allow the simultaneous construction and use of biomarkers, during an ongoing trial. We first detail common scenarios where adaptive enrichment designs could be fruitfully applied to gain efficiency over classical designs. We then discuss two classes of adaptive enrichment strategies: Adaptation based on prespecified covariate-based stratification, and adaptation based on modeling response as a potentially more complex function of covariates. We will contrast these strategies with more classical non-enriched biomarker strategies (based on post hoc modeling/testing). Finally, we will discuss and address a number of potential issues and concerns with adaptive enrichment designs.

[1]  V. Jordan A current view of tamoxifen for the treatment and prevention of breast cancer , 1993 .

[2]  Kirsten ras mutations in patients with colorectal cancer: the ‘RASCAL II’ study , 2001, British Journal of Cancer.

[3]  K. Kinzler,et al.  Tumorigenesis: RAF/RAS oncogenes and mismatch-repair status , 2002, Nature.

[4]  D. Dunson,et al.  Bayesian Multivariate Logistic Regression , 2004, Biometrics.

[5]  P. Bauer,et al.  Modification of the sample size and the schedule of interim analyses in survival trials based on data inspections by H. Schäfer and H.‐H. Müller, Statistics in Medicine 2001; 20: 3741–3751 , 2004, Statistics in medicine.

[6]  M. Cronin,et al.  Gene expression and benefit of chemotherapy in women with node-negative, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. , 2006, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[7]  Frank Bretz,et al.  Confirmatory Seamless Phase II/III Clinical Trials with Hypotheses Selection at Interim: General Concepts , 2006, Biometrical journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift.

[8]  A. Lièvre,et al.  KRAS mutation status is predictive of response to cetuximab therapy in colorectal cancer. , 2006, Cancer research.

[9]  S. Shak,et al.  A population-based study of tumor gene expression and risk of breast cancer death among lymph node-negative patients , 2006, Breast Cancer Research.

[10]  P. Johnston,et al.  BRCA1, a potential predictive biomarker in the treatment of breast cancer. , 2007, The oncologist.

[11]  P. Grigsby,et al.  The standardized uptake value for F‐18 fluorodeoxyglucose is a sensitive predictive biomarker for cervical cancer treatment response and survival , 2007, Cancer.

[12]  C. Hudis Trastuzumab--mechanism of action and use in clinical practice. , 2007, The New England journal of medicine.

[13]  Sue-Jane Wang,et al.  Approaches to evaluation of treatment effect in randomized clinical trials with genomic subset , 2007, Pharmaceutical statistics.

[14]  M. Carini,et al.  Seminal plasma cytokines and chemokines in prostate inflammation: interleukin 8 as a predictive biomarker in chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome and benign prostatic hyperplasia. , 2007, European urology.

[15]  Christopher Jennison,et al.  Adaptive Seamless Designs: Selection and Prospective Testing of Hypotheses , 2007, Journal of biopharmaceutical statistics.

[16]  Daniel J. Freeman,et al.  Wild-type KRAS is required for panitumumab efficacy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. , 2008, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[17]  L. Mazzucchelli,et al.  Wild-type BRAF is required for response to panitumumab or cetuximab in metastatic colorectal cancer. , 2008, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[18]  F. Grenier,et al.  Urine NGAL predicts severity of acute kidney injury after cardiac surgery: a prospective study. , 2008, Clinical journal of the American Society of Nephrology : CJASN.

[19]  J. Ross,et al.  The HER-2 receptor and breast cancer: ten years of targeted anti-HER-2 therapy and personalized medicine. , 2009, The oncologist.

[20]  C. Bokemeyer,et al.  Fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin with and without cetuximab in the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. , 2009, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[21]  Sue-Jane Wang,et al.  Adaptive patient enrichment designs in therapeutic trials , 2009, Biometrical journal. Biometrische Zeitschrift.

[22]  Kam Y. J. Zhang,et al.  Clinical efficacy of a RAF inhibitor needs broad target blockade in BRAF-mutant melanoma , 2010, Nature.

[23]  C. Mehta,et al.  Population Enrichment Designs: Case Study of a Large Multinational Trial , 2011, Journal of biopharmaceutical statistics.

[24]  L. Tian,et al.  Analysis of randomized comparative clinical trial data for personalized treatment selections. , 2011, Biostatistics.

[25]  M. J. van der Laan,et al.  Optimizing randomized trial designs to distinguish which subpopulations benefit from treatment. , 2011, Biometrika.

[26]  C. Bokemeyer,et al.  Addition of cetuximab to chemotherapy as first-line treatment for KRAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer: pooled analysis of the CRYSTAL and OPUS randomised clinical trials. , 2012, European journal of cancer.

[27]  C. Drake,et al.  Safety and activity of anti-PD-L1 antibody in patients with advanced cancer. , 2012, The New England journal of medicine.

[28]  T. Friede,et al.  A conditional error function approach for subgroup selection in adaptive clinical trials , 2012, Statistics in medicine.

[29]  Baldur P Magnusson,et al.  Group sequential enrichment design incorporating subgroup selection , 2013, Statistics in medicine.

[30]  N. Simon,et al.  Adaptive enrichment designs for clinical trials. , 2013, Biostatistics.

[31]  J. Tabernero,et al.  Panitumumab-FOLFOX4 treatment and RAS mutations in colorectal cancer. , 2013, The New England journal of medicine.

[32]  Wenyu Jiang,et al.  A hierarchical Bayes model for biomarker subset effects in clinical trials , 2014, Comput. Stat. Data Anal..

[33]  B. Freidlin,et al.  Biomarker enrichment strategies: matching trial design to biomarker credentials , 2014, Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology.

[34]  Lihui Zhao,et al.  A predictive enrichment procedure to identify potential responders to a new therapy for randomized, comparative controlled clinical studies. , 2016, Biometrics.

[35]  Frank Bretz,et al.  Twenty‐five years of confirmatory adaptive designs: opportunities and pitfalls , 2015, Statistics in medicine.