An ongoing adaptive PII/III trial with dose selection A pragmatic - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
An ongoing adaptive PII/III trial with dose selection A pragmatic - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
An ongoing adaptive PII/III trial with dose selection A pragmatic solution for a development programme Andrew Stone 14 th Dec 2007 Background & rationale AZ Case Study in an area of high unmet need Desire to develop important new
SLIDE 1
SLIDE 2
Source: xxxxxxx
Background & rationale
AZ Case Study in an area of high unmet need Desire to develop important new medicines efficiently Want to make sure the opportunity is taken to minimise patient exposure, and optimise resources of AZ and trialists, if the agent is insufficiently effective Optimise dose selection Trial design created to meet these needs
– Did not know it would be called an Adaptive design BUT – Naturally only too aware of data access issues and control of Type I error
SLIDE 3
Source: xxxxxxx
Adaptive, seamless PII/III design with dose selection
Dose1 Dose2 Control
Decision Criteria Met? Phase II analysis
No
Unblind data and review
Yes
Continue to PIII Drop 1 dose arm
R a n d
- m
i s e
SLIDE 4
Source: xxxxxxx
PII data access
End of phase II (EOPII) GO criteria pre-defined An IDMC performing the EOPII analysis
– The EOPII criteria are documented in an IDMC charter that only AZ and IDMC have access to
Should the criteria be achieved, PII results will not be disclosed to either AZ or investigators Our philosophy is that if results are good, AZ and investigators do not need to know just how good
SLIDE 5
Source: xxxxxxx
EOPII GO criteria definition
Lack of PII access puts a premium on a thorough understanding and sponsor acceptance of GO/NO GO criteria Necessarily a lengthy and detailed process to define Used predictive power methodology to guide approach
– A Bayesian approach but crucially one where the prior is based on data and not opinion
SLIDE 6
Source: xxxxxxx
Phase III data analysis
A single test of continued dose vs control group
– Includes PII patients – Equal weight is given per patient – No- p-value combination or aggregating of doses
Phase III analysis approach fixed in the protocol including factors that stratify the analysis
SLIDE 7
Source: xxxxxxx
0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Correlation between Zscore for PII and PIII endpoints
Type I Error
always continue
Type I error considerations for PII/III trials with dose selection
0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Correlation between Zscore for PII and PIII endpoints
Type I Error
always continue numerical superiority
- Final significance level requires minimal adjustment
even with studies without futility analyses and a strong correlation between PII and PIII endpoints Example where PII analysis performed at 5% of PIII events
Stallard and Todd SIM 2003 22:689-703 & Todd and Stallard DIJ 2005 39:109-118
SLIDE 8
Source: xxxxxxx
Advantages of programme
Provides the potential to deliver the new therapy to patients, in an area of high unmet need, with significant time savings Minimises patient exposure, and optimises resources AZ and trialists, if new therapy insufficiently effective
SLIDE 9
Source: xxxxxxx
Casodex 150mg (n=60) Casodex 100mg (n=60) Castration (n=30)
None of this new! 1992 Casodex Adaptive design
Pre-planned dose selection on PSA Data from patients recruited prior to dose selection included in final efficacy assessment of Overall Survival
Dose selection %fall in PSA @12 wk
Casodex 150mg (n=760) Castration (n=380)
SLIDE 10
Source: xxxxxxx