Dataset Information

A hybrid phase I-II/III clinical trial design allowing dose re-optimization in phase III.

ABSTRACT: Conventionally, evaluation of a new drug, A, is done in three phases. Phase I is based on toxicity to determine a "maximum tolerable dose" (MTD) of A, phase II is conducted to decide whether A at the MTD is promising in terms of response probability, and if so a large randomized phase III trial is conducted to compare A to a control treatment, C, usually based on survival time or progression free survival time. It is widely recognized that this paradigm has many flaws. A recent approach combines the first two phases by conducting a phase I-II trial, which chooses an optimal dose based on both efficacy and toxicity, and evaluation of A at the selected optimal phase I-II dose then is done in a phase III trial. This paper proposes a new design paradigm, motivated by the possibility that the optimal phase I-II dose may not maximize mean survival time with A. We propose a hybridized design, which we call phase I-II/III, that combines phase I-II and phase III by allowing the chosen optimal phase I-II dose of A to be re-optimized based on survival time data from phase I-II patients and the first portion of phase III. The phase I-II/III design uses adaptive randomization in phase I-II, and relies on a mixture model for the survival time distribution as a function of efficacy, toxicity, and dose. A simulation study is presented to evaluate the phase I-II/III design and compare it to the usual approach that does not re-optimize the dose of A in phase III.

SUBMITTER: Chapple AG

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6486466 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A hybrid phase I-II/III clinical trial design allowing dose re-optimization in phase III.

Chapple Andrew G AG Thall Peter F PF

Biometrics 20190403 2

Conventionally, evaluation of a new drug, A, is done in three phases. Phase I is based on toxicity to determine a "maximum tolerable dose" (MTD) of A, phase II is conducted to decide whether A at the MTD is promising in terms of response probability, and if so a large randomized phase III trial is conducted to compare A to a control treatment, C, usually based on survival time or progression free survival time. It is widely recognized that this paradigm has many flaws. A recent approach combines ...[more]

PMID: 30367457

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVES:A relationship between reduced brain tissue oxygenation and poor outcome following severe traumatic brain injury has been reported in observational studies. We designed a Phase II trial to assess whether a neurocritical care management protocol could improve brain tissue oxygenation levels in patients with severe traumatic brain injury and the feasibility of a Phase III efficacy study. DESIGN:Randomized prospective clinical trial. SETTING:Ten ICUs in the United States. PATIENTS:One hundred nineteen severe traumatic brain injury patients. INTERVENTIONS:Patients were randomized to treatment protocol based on intracranial pressure plus brain tissue oxygenation monitoring versus intracranial pressure monitoring alone. Brain tissue oxygenation data were recorded in the intracranial pressure -only group in blinded fashion. Tiered interventions in each arm were specified and impact on intracranial pressure and brain tissue oxygenation measured. Monitors were removed if values were normal for 48 hours consecutively, or after 5 days. Outcome was measured at 6 months using the Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:A management protocol based on brain tissue oxygenation and intracranial pressure monitoring reduced the proportion of time with brain tissue hypoxia after severe traumatic brain injury (0.45 in intracranial pressure-only group and 0.16 in intracranial pressure plus brain tissue oxygenation group; p < 0.0001). Intracranial pressure control was similar in both groups. Safety and feasibility of the tiered treatment protocol were confirmed. There were no procedure-related complications. Treatment of secondary injury after severe traumatic brain injury based on brain tissue oxygenation and intracranial pressure values was consistent with reduced mortality and increased proportions of patients with good recovery compared with intracranial pressure-only management; however, the study was not powered for clinical efficacy. CONCLUSIONS:Management of severe traumatic brain injury informed by multimodal intracranial pressure and brain tissue oxygenation monitoring reduced brain tissue hypoxia with a trend toward lower mortality and more favorable outcomes than intracranial pressure-only treatment. A Phase III randomized trial to assess impact on neurologic outcome of intracranial pressure plus brain tissue oxygenation-directed treatment of severe traumatic brain injury is warranted.

Dataset Information

A hybrid phase I-II/III clinical trial design allowing dose re-optimization in phase III.

Publications

A hybrid phase I-II/III clinical trial design allowing dose re-optimization in phase III.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure