Dataset Information

Designs for adding a treatment arm to an ongoing clinical trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

For many disease areas, there are often treatments in different stages of the development process. We consider the design of a two-arm parallel group trial where it is planned to add a new experimental treatment arm during the trial. This could potentially save money, patients, time and resources; however, the addition of a treatment arm creates a multiple comparison problem. Current practice in trials when a new treatment arm has been added is to compare the new treatment only to controls randomised concurrently, and this is the setting we consider here. Furthermore, for standard multi-arm trials, optimal allocation randomises a larger number of patients to the control arm than to each experimental treatment arm.

Methods

In this paper we propose an adaptive design, the aim of which is to adapt the sample size of the trial when the new treatment arm is added to control the family-wise error rate (FWER) in the strong sense, whilst maintaining the marginal power of each treatment-to-control comparison at the level of the original study. We explore optimal allocation for designs where a treatment arm is added with the aim of increasing the overall power of the study, where we define the overall power to be the probability of detecting all treatments that are better than the control.

Results and conclusions

An increase in sample size is required to maintain the marginal power for each pairwise comparison when adding a treatment arm if control of the FWER is required at the level of the type I error in the original study. When control of the FWER is required in a single trial which adds an additional experimental treatment arm, but control of the FWER is not required in separate trials, depending on the design characteristics, it may be better to run a separate trial for each experimental treatment, in terms of the number of patients required. An increase in overall power can be achieved when optimal allocation is used once a treatment arm has been added to the trial, rather than continuing with equal allocation to all treatment arms.

SUBMITTER: Bennett M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7060622 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Designs for adding a treatment arm to an ongoing clinical trial.

Bennett Maxine M Mander Adrian P AP

Trials 20200306 1

<h4>Background</h4>For many disease areas, there are often treatments in different stages of the development process. We consider the design of a two-arm parallel group trial where it is planned to add a new experimental treatment arm during the trial. This could potentially save money, patients, time and resources; however, the addition of a treatment arm creates a multiple comparison problem. Current practice in trials when a new treatment arm has been added is to compare the new treatment onl ...[more]

PMID: 32143729

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundMulti-arm multi-stage trials are an efficient, adaptive approach for testing many treatments simultaneously within one protocol. In settings where numbers of patients available to be entered into trials and resources might be limited, such as primary postpartum haemorrhage, it may be necessary to select a pre-specified subset of arms at interim stages even if they are all showing some promise against the control arm. This will put a limit on the maximum number of patients required and reduce the associated costs. Motivated by the World Health Organization Refractory HaEmorrhage Devices trial in postpartum haemorrhage, we explored the properties of such a selection design in a randomised phase III setting and compared it with other alternatives. The objectives are: (1) to investigate how the timing of treatment selection affects the operating characteristics; (2) to explore the use of an information-rich (continuous) intermediate outcome to select the best-performing arm, out of four treatment arms, compared with using the primary (binary) outcome for selection at the interim stage; and (3) to identify factors that can affect the efficiency of the design.MethodsWe conducted simulations based on the refractory haemorrhage devices multi-arm multi-stage selection trial to investigate the impact of the timing of treatment selection and applying an adaptive allocation ratio on the probability of correct selection, overall power and familywise type I error rate. Simulations were also conducted to explore how other design parameters will affect both the maximum sample size and trial timelines.ResultsThe results indicate that the overall power of the trial is bounded by the probability of 'correct' selection at the selection stage. The results showed that good operating characteristics are achieved if the treatment selection is conducted at around 17% of information time. Our results also showed that although randomising more patients to research arms before selection will increase the probability of selecting correctly, this will not increase the overall efficiency of the (selection) design compared with the fixed allocation ratio of 1:1 to all arms throughout.ConclusionsMulti-arm multi-stage selection designs are efficient and flexible with desirable operating characteristics. We give guidance on many aspects of these designs including selecting the intermediate outcome measure, the timing of treatment selection, and choosing the operating characteristics.

Project description:Background: The pathogenesis of pityriasis rubra pilaris (PRP) is not completely understood, but interleukin (IL)-17 has been shown to play a critical role. There are no reliable immunomodulatory agents to treat PRP. We conducted an open-label, single-arm clinical trial of secukinumab, a monoclonal antibody that inhibits IL-17A, for the treatment of PRP. Objectives: To evaluate the clinical efficacy of secukinumab and define the transcriptomic landscape of PRP and its response to IL-17A blockade. Methods: Twelve patients with PRP were recruited for an open-label trial of secukinumab. Patients received a 24-week course of secukinumab. The primary endpoint was a ≥ 75% reduction in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI 75) from baseline to week 28. Secondary endpoints included PASI 90, change in Physician's Global Assessment (PGA), and change in Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI). RNA sequencing was performed on lesional and nonlesional skin biopsies obtained at baseline and week 2. Sample groups were compared to identify differential gene expression and pathway enrichment. This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov: 'Cosentyx (secukinumab) for the treatment of adult onset pityriasis rubra pilaris' - NCT03342573. Results: At week 28, six of 11 patients (55%) achieved PASI 75, and three patients (27%) achieved PASI 90. PGA (P = 0.008) and DLQI scores (P = 0.010) showed significant improvement with treatment. No serious treatment-related adverse events were encountered. Treatment with secukinumab normalized transcriptional differences between lesional and nonlesional skin. Transcriptomic data from nonresponsive patients suggest that overactivity of innate immune pathways may be driving resistance to secukinumab. Conclusions: Secukinumab appears to be an effective treatment for PRP and warrants further investigation. PRP is a transcriptionally heterogeneous disease, reflecting its variable response to therapy. Agents targeting other IL-17 isoforms and innate immune mediators should be considered for future clinical trials. What is already known about this topic? The pathogenesis of pityriasis rubra pilaris is incompletely understood. Successful treatment has been reported with a variety of immunomodulatory agents, but disease is often refractory to therapy. Interleukin (IL)-17 is thought to drive keratinocyte proliferation and vascular dysfunction in this disease. A previous trial demonstrated efficacy of the anti-IL-17A drug ixekizumab for pityriasis rubra pilaris. What does this study add? Herein we describe the findings of a clinical trial of secukinumab, an anti-IL-17A monoclonal antibody, for the treatment of pityriasis rubra pilaris. Secukinumab was effective in treating pityriasis rubra pilaris. Our transcriptomic data give new insight into the expressional changes that occur in response to secukinumab and suggest mechanisms of treatment resistance.

Project description:Four randomized placebo-controlled efficacy trials of a candidate vaccine or passively infused monoclonal antibody for prevention of HIV-1 infection are underway (HVTN 702 in South African men and women; HVTN 705 in sub-Saharan African women; HVTN 703/HPTN 081 in sub-Saharan African women; HVTN 704/HPTN 085 in U.S., Peruvian, Brazilian, and Swiss men or transgender persons who have sex with men). Several challenges are posed to the optimal design of the sequel efficacy trials, including: (1) how to account for the evolving mosaic of effective prevention interventions that may be part of the trial design or standard of prevention; (2) how to define viable and optimal sequel trial designs depending on the primary efficacy results and secondary "correlates of protection" results of each of the ongoing trials; and (3) how to define the primary objective of sequel efficacy trials if HIV-1 incidence is expected to be very low in all study arms such that a standard trial design has a steep opportunity cost. After summarizing the ongoing trials, I discuss statistical science considerations for sequel efficacy trial designs, both generally and specifically to each trial listed above. One conclusion is that the results of "correlates of protection" analyses, which ascertain how different host immunological markers and HIV-1 viral features impact HIV-1 risk and prevention efficacy, have an important influence on sequel trial design. This influence is especially relevant for the monoclonal antibody trials because of the focused pre-trial hypothesis that potency and coverage of serum neutralization constitutes a surrogate endpoint for HIV-1 infection. Another conclusion is that while assessing prevention efficacy against a counterfactual placebo group is fraught with risks for bias, such analysis is nonetheless important and study designs coupled with analysis methods should be developed to optimize such inferences. I draw a parallel with non-inferiority designs, which are fraught with risks given the necessity of making unverifiable assumptions for interpreting results, but nevertheless have been accepted when a superiority design is not possible and a rigorous/conservative non-inferiority margin is used. In a similar way, counterfactual placebo group efficacy analysis should use rigorous/conservative inference techniques that formally build in a rigorous/conservative margin to potential biases that could occur due to departures from unverifiable assumptions. Because reliability of this approach would require new techniques for verifying that the study cohort experienced substantial exposure to HIV-1, currently it may be appropriate as a secondary objective but not as a primary objective.

Dataset Information

Designs for adding a treatment arm to an ongoing clinical trial.

Background

Methods

Results and conclusions

Publications

Designs for adding a treatment arm to an ongoing clinical trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets