Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, NC (S.J.G., R.J.M., M.F., C.M.O.).
Division of Cardiology, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC (S.J.G., R.J.M.).
Circulation. 2018 Sep 4;138(10):1039-1053. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.118.034668.
With few notable exceptions, drug development for heart failure (HF) has become progressively more challenging, and there remain no definitively proven therapies for patients with acute HF or HF with preserved ejection fraction. Inspection of temporal trends suggests an increasing rate of disagreement between early-phase and phase III trial end points. Preliminary results from phase II HF trials are frequently promising, but increasingly followed by disappointing phase III results. Given this potential disconnect, it is reasonable to carefully re-evaluate the purpose, design, and execution of phase II HF trials, with particular attention directed toward the surrogate end points commonly used by these studies. In this review, we offer a critical reappraisal of the role of phase II HF trials and surrogate end points, highlighting challenges in their use and interpretation, lessons learned from past experiences, and specific strengths and weaknesses of various surrogate outcomes. We conclude by proposing a series of approaches that should be considered for the goal of optimizing the efficiency of HF drug development. This review is based on discussions between scientists, clinical trialists, industry and government sponsors, and regulators that took place at the Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists Forum in Washington, DC, on December 2, 2016.
除了少数显著的例外,心力衰竭(HF)的药物研发变得越来越具有挑战性,对于急性 HF 或射血分数保留的 HF 患者,仍然没有明确证实的治疗方法。对时间趋势的检查表明,早期和 III 期试验终点之间的不一致率越来越高。来自 II 期 HF 试验的初步结果通常很有希望,但越来越多的 III 期结果令人失望。鉴于这种潜在的脱节,有理由仔细重新评估 II 期 HF 试验的目的、设计和执行,特别关注这些研究中常用的替代终点。在这篇综述中,我们对 II 期 HF 试验和替代终点的作用进行了批判性的重新评估,强调了它们在使用和解释方面的挑战,从过去的经验中吸取的教训,以及各种替代结果的具体优势和劣势。最后,我们提出了一系列方法,这些方法应考虑用于优化 HF 药物开发的效率。本综述基于 2016 年 12 月 2 日在华盛顿特区举行的心血管临床试验研究人员论坛上科学家、临床试验研究人员、工业界和政府赞助商以及监管机构之间的讨论。