Chi George Y H, Li Yihan, Liu Yanning, Lewin David, Lim Pilar
Janssen Research & Development, L.L.C, USA.
AbbVie, Pharmaceutical Research & Development, L.L.C, USA.
Contemp Clin Trials Commun. 2015 Nov 18;2:34-53. doi: 10.1016/j.conctc.2015.10.002. eCollection 2016 Apr 15.
The basic problem that causes the frequent failure of a standard randomized parallel placebo-controlled clinical trial with a high placebo response rate is the underestimation of the treatment effect by the observed relative treatment difference. A two-period sequential parallel enrichment design has been proposed where the first period is a standard parallel design and at the end of the first period, the placebo non-responders are identified and re-randomized in the second period. Based on such a design, available methods have primarily focused on testing either the first period treatment null hypothesis or the global null hypothesis defined as the joint period 1 and period 2 treatment effect null hypothesis by a test statistic which is either derived from a combined statistic or defined directly as a weighted z-score where the weights are functions of some population and design parameters satisfying certain power optimality criterion. However, in some cases, it is not clear what their combined statistics are estimating and in others, the combined statistics are estimating the apparent treatment effect; but generally, there is no discussion of the need to provide a proper assessment of the treatment effect for the intended study population. It should be clear that an appropriate assessment of the treatment effect for the intended study population is critical for the benefit/risk analysis as well as the proper dosage recommendation. Any benefit/risk analysis and dosage recommendation that are based on an apparent treatment effect from a standard parallel design such as the first period of a sequential parallel enrichment design tend to underestimate the benefit/risk ratio which in turn may lead to overdosing recommendation. It is the purpose of this paper to introduce the concept of an adjusted treatment effect which is derived by adjusting the apparent treatment effect from the first period of a sequential parallel enrichment design with information from the second period subject to a consistency condition. The adjustment properly compensates for the high placebo response rate. It is proposed that this adjusted treatment effect should be used to assess the treatment effect for the intended study population and should be the basis for the benefit/risk analysis and the dosage recommendation.
在安慰剂反应率较高的情况下,标准随机平行安慰剂对照临床试验频繁失败的基本问题在于,观察到的相对治疗差异会低估治疗效果。有人提出了一种两阶段序贯平行富集设计,其中第一阶段是标准平行设计,在第一阶段结束时,识别出安慰剂无反应者,并在第二阶段重新随机分组。基于这种设计,现有方法主要集中于通过检验统计量来检验第一阶段治疗无效假设或定义为第一阶段和第二阶段联合治疗效果无效假设的全局无效假设,该检验统计量要么源自组合统计量,要么直接定义为加权z分数,其中权重是满足某些功效最优标准的一些总体和设计参数的函数。然而,在某些情况下,不清楚它们的组合统计量估计的是什么,而在其他情况下,组合统计量估计的是表面治疗效果;但一般来说,对于为目标研究人群提供治疗效果的恰当评估的必要性没有进行讨论。应当明确的是,对目标研究人群的治疗效果进行恰当评估对于获益/风险分析以及恰当的剂量推荐至关重要。任何基于标准平行设计(如序贯平行富集设计的第一阶段)的表面治疗效果的获益/风险分析和剂量推荐往往会低估获益/风险比,进而可能导致过量用药的推荐。本文的目的是引入调整后治疗效果的概念,该概念是通过利用第二阶段的信息对序贯平行富集设计第一阶段的表面治疗效果进行调整,并满足一致性条件而得出的。这种调整恰当地补偿了较高的安慰剂反应率。建议使用这种调整后治疗效果来评估目标研究人群中的治疗效果,并应作为获益/风险分析和剂量推荐的基础。