Bothwell Laura E, Avorn Jerry, Khan Nazleen F, Kesselheim Aaron S
Program on Regulation, Therapeutics, and Law (PORTAL), Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
BMJ Open. 2018 Feb 10;8(2):e018320. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-018320.
This review investigates characteristics of implemented adaptive design clinical trials and provides examples of regulatory experience with such trials.
Review of adaptive design clinical trials in EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Registry of Controlled Clinical Trials, Web of Science and ClinicalTrials.gov. Phase I and seamless Phase I/II trials were excluded. Variables extracted from trials included basic study characteristics, adaptive design features, size and use of independent data monitoring committees (DMCs) and blinded interim analyses. We also examined use of the adaptive trials in new drug submissions to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medicines Agency (EMA) and recorded regulators' experiences with adaptive designs.
142 studies met inclusion criteria. There has been a recent growth in publicly reported use of adaptive designs among researchers around the world. The most frequently appearing types of adaptations were seamless Phase II/III (57%), group sequential (21%), biomarker adaptive (20%), and adaptive dose-finding designs (16%). About one-third (32%) of trials reported an independent DMC, while 6% reported blinded interim analysis. We found that 9% of adaptive trials were used for FDA product approval consideration, and 12% were used for EMA product approval consideration. International regulators had mixed experiences with adaptive trials. Many product applications with adaptive trials had extensive correspondence between drug sponsors and regulators regarding the adaptive designs, in some cases with regulators requiring revisions or alterations to research designs.
Wider use of adaptive designs will necessitate new drug application sponsors to engage with regulatory scientists during planning and conduct of the trials. Investigators need to more consistently report protections intended to preserve confidentiality and minimise potential operational bias during interim analysis.
本综述调查已实施的适应性设计临床试验的特征,并提供此类试验的监管经验示例。
对EMBASE、PubMed、Cochrane临床对照试验注册库、科学网和ClinicalTrials.gov上的适应性设计临床试验进行综述。排除I期试验和无缝I/II期试验。从试验中提取的变量包括基础研究特征、适应性设计特征、独立数据监测委员会(DMC)的规模和使用情况以及盲态中期分析。我们还研究了适应性试验在向美国食品药品监督管理局(FDA)和欧洲药品管理局(EMA)提交的新药申请中的使用情况,并记录了监管机构对适应性设计的经验。
142项研究符合纳入标准。最近,世界各地研究人员公开报告的适应性设计使用有所增加。最常出现的适应性类型是无缝II/III期(57%)、成组序贯(21%)、生物标志物适应性(20%)和适应性剂量探索设计(16%)。约三分之一(32%)的试验报告有独立的DMC,而6%报告有盲态中期分析。我们发现,9%的适应性试验用于FDA产品批准考虑,12%用于EMA产品批准考虑。国际监管机构对适应性试验的经验不一。许多采用适应性试验的产品申请在药物申办者和监管机构之间就适应性设计进行了广泛的沟通,在某些情况下,监管机构要求对研究设计进行修订或更改。
适应性设计的更广泛使用将使新药申请申办者在试验规划和实施过程中与监管科学家进行更多合作。研究人员需要更一致地报告旨在在中期分析期间保护保密性和尽量减少潜在操作偏差的措施。