Department of Biostatistics, Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd., Basel, Switzerland.
Department of Biostatistics, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd., Shanghai, China.
Contemp Clin Trials. 2016 Mar;47:78-84. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2015.12.014. Epub 2015 Dec 29.
Given ever increasing costs to develop a new drug and intense competition, adaptive enrichment designs are an attractive option for a development program that allows selecting a potential subgroup defined by a binary biomarker. Such designs explicitly factor in the possibility that the new drug might differentially benefit distinct biomarker subgroups. We have compared three clinical development plans for a time-to-event endpoint, such as overall survival, that all lead to a decision in a pivotal trial either in all comers only, in allcomers and biomarker positive, in the biomarker positive only, or to declare the drug futile. The decision about which hypothesis to test at the final analysis is made based on a fast time-to-event endpoint, such as progression-free survival, at an interim analysis. We quantify the time gain when using an adaptive enrichment Phase II/III design versus alternative development approaches and we outline what type of biomarker needs to be available prior to Phase II in each scenario. We conclude with a discussion of further features of each of the considered development plans.
鉴于开发新药的成本不断增加和竞争激烈,适应性富集设计对于开发计划来说是一个有吸引力的选择,该计划允许选择由二进制生物标志物定义的潜在亚组。此类设计明确考虑了新药可能对不同生物标志物亚组产生不同影响的可能性。我们比较了三种针对时间事件终点(如总生存期)的临床开发计划,所有这些计划都在关键试验中做出决策,要么仅在所有入组患者中进行,要么在所有入组患者和生物标志物阳性患者中进行,要么在仅生物标志物阳性患者中进行,要么宣布药物无效。最终分析中测试哪个假设的决定是基于中期分析中快速的时间事件终点,如无进展生存期。我们量化了使用适应性富集 II/III 期设计与替代开发方法相比的时间收益,并概述了在每种情况下在 II 期之前需要何种类型的生物标志物。最后,我们讨论了所考虑的每个开发计划的进一步特点。