Adaptive design (medicine)

Last updated

In an adaptive design of a clinical trial, the parameters and conduct of the trial for a candidate drug or vaccine may be changed based on an interim analysis. [1] [2] [3] Adaptive design typically involves advanced statistics to interpret a clinical trial endpoint. [2] This is in contrast to traditional single-arm (i.e. non-randomized) clinical trials or randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that are static in their protocol and do not modify any parameters until the trial is completed. The adaptation process takes place at certain points in the trial, prescribed in the trial protocol. Importantly, this trial protocol is set before the trial begins with the adaptation schedule and processes specified. Adaptions may include modifications to: dosage, sample size, drug undergoing trial, patient selection criteria and/or "cocktail" mix. [4] The PANDA (A Practical Adaptive & Novel Designs and Analysis toolkit) provides not only a summary of different adaptive designs, but also comprehensive information on adaptive design planning, conduct, analysis and reporting. [5]

Contents

Schematic block diagram of an adaptive design for a clinical trial Schematic block diagram of Adaptive (Pharmaceutical) Clinical Trial Design after PMID 29490655.png
Schematic block diagram of an adaptive design for a clinical trial


Purpose

The aim of an adaptive trial is to more quickly identify drugs or devices that have a therapeutic effect, and to zero in on patient populations for whom the drug is appropriate. [6] When conducted efficiently, adaptive trials have the potential to find new treatments while minimizing the number of patients exposed to the risks of clinical trials. Specifically, adaptive trials can efficiently discover new treatments by reducing the number of patients enrolled in treatment groups that show minimal efficacy or higher adverse-event rates. Adaptive trials can adjust almost any part of its design, based on pre-set rules and statistical design, such as sample size, adding new groups, dropping less effective groups and changing the probability of being randomized to a particular group, for example.

History

In 2004, a Strategic Path Initiative was introduced by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to modify the way drugs travel from lab to market. This initiative aimed at dealing with the high attrition levels observed in the clinical phase. It also attempted to offer flexibility to investigators to find the optimal clinical benefit without affecting the study's validity. Adaptive clinical trials initially came under this regime. [7]

The FDA issued draft guidance on adaptive trial design in 2010. [6] In 2012, the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) recommended that FDA "run pilot projects to explore adaptive approval mechanisms to generate evidence across the lifecycle of a drug from the pre-market through the post-market phase." While not specifically related to clinical trials, the council also recommended that FDA "make full use of accelerated approval for all drugs meeting the statutory standard of addressing an unmet need for a serious or life-threatening disease, and demonstrating an impact on a clinical endpoint other than survival or irreversible morbidity, or on a surrogate endpoint, likely to predict clinical benefit." [8]

By 2019, the FDA updated their 2010 recommendations and issued "Adaptive Design Clinical Trials for Drugs and Biologics Guidance". [9]

Characteristics

Traditionally, clinical trials are conducted in three steps: [2]

  1. The trial is designed.
  2. The trial is conducted as prescribed by the design.
  3. Once the data are ready, they are analysed according to a pre-specified analysis plan.

Types

Overview

Any trial design that can change its design, during active enrollment, could be considered an adaptive clinical trial. There are a number of different types, and real life trials may combine elements from these different trial types: [2] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] In some cases, trials have become an ongoing process that regularly adds and drops therapies and patient groups as more information is gained. [7]

Trial Design TypeAdaptable ElementDescription
Dose-findingTreatment doseDose may be changed to find minimally toxic, and maximally effective dosing.
Adaptive hypothesisTrial endpointsAccording to pre-set protocols, these trials can adapt to investigate new hypothesis, and add new endpoints accordingly. An example would be switch from a superiority to a non-inferiority design.
Group sequentialSample size, by a set interval at a time.Sample sizes can be changed. These trials usually change the sample size by adding or removing set-blocks of patients such as adding 20 patients at a time, and then re-evaluating. This type of design is explained in detail on PANDA. [5]
Response adaptive randomisationRandomization ratiosThe chance of being randomized into one particular group, can change. Treatment groups are not added or dropped, but the chance of being randomized, for example, into the treatment group could increase after interim analysis. This type of design is explained in detail on PANDA. [5]
Adaptive treatment-switchingTreatmentThese trials, based on pre-set rules, can change individual patients from one group to another.
Biomarker adaptiveMultiple, on the basis of biomarker discoveriesThese trials incorporated biomarkers into their decision making process. Examples including focusing on a sub-population that may be more biological receptive to a treatment, or choosing new treatments for a trial as more becomes known about the biology of the disease.
Population enrichmentPopulation enrolledThe population that the trial enrolls from may change based on, for example, improved epidemiological understanding of a disease. This type of design is explained in detail on PANDA. [5]
Platform Trial Multiple, on the basis that all different treatment groups share the same, single control groupPlatform trials are defined by having a constant control group, against which variable treatment groups are compared.
Multi-arm multi-stageThe current treatment armsThese trials adapt to stop recruitment to treatment arms that show less efficacy and therefore they do not allocate new participants to the least effective-seeming treatment arms. This type of design is explained in detail on PANDA. [5]
Sample size re-estimationSample sizeSample sizes of either the whole trial or individual groups may change as more becomes known about effect sizes. This type of design is explained in detail on PANDA. [5]
Seamless Phase I/IIEntry into phase II trialsThese trials collect data on safety and dosing simultaneously.
Seamless Phase II/IIIEntry into phase III trialsThese trials collect data on dosing and efficacy simultaneously.

Dose finding design

Phase I of clinical research focuses on selecting a particular dose of a drug to carry forward into future trials. Historically, such trials have had a "rules-based" (or "algorithm-based") design, such as the 3+3 design. [15] However, these "A+B" rules-based designs are not appropriate for phase I studies and are inferior to adaptive, model-based designs. [16] An example of a superior design is the continual reassessment method (CRM). [17] [18] [19]

Group sequential design

Group sequential design is the application of sequential analysis to clinical trials. At each interim analysis, investigators will use the current data to decide whether the trial should either stop or should continue to recruit more participants. The trial might stop either because the evidence that the treatment is working is strong ("stopping for benefit") or weak ("stopping for futility"). Whether a trial may stop for futility only, benefit only, or either, is stated in advance. A design has "binding stopping rules" when the trial must stop when a particular threshold of (either strong or weak) evidence is crossed at a particular interim analysis. Otherwise it has "non-binding stopping rules", in which case other information can be taken into account, for example safety data. The number of interim analyses is specified in advance, and can be anything from a single interim analysis (a "two-stage" design") to an interim analysis after every participant ("continuous monitoring").

For trials with a binary (response/no response) outcome and a single treatment arm, a popular and simple group sequential design with two stages is the Simon design. In this design, there is a single interim analysis partway through the trial, at which point the trial either stops for futility or continues to the second stage. [20] Mander and Thomson also proposed a design with a single interim analysis, at which point the trial could stop for either futility or benefit. [21]

For single-arm, single-stage binary outcome trials, a trial's success or failure is determined by the number of responses observed by the end of the trial. This means that it may be possible to know the conclusion of the trial (success or failure) with certainty before all the data are available. Planning to stop a trial once the conclusion is known with certainty is called non-stochastic curtailment. This reduces the sample size on average. Planning to stop a trial when the probability of success, based on the results so far, is either above or below a certain threshold is called stochastic curtailment. This reduces the average sample size even more than non-stochastic curtailment. Stochastic and non-stochastic curtailment can also be used in two-arm binary outcome trials, where a trial's success or failure is determined by the number of responses observed on each arm by the end of the trial.

An example of a Simon design, a two-stage design for a binary outcome trial. Example of Simon design.png
An example of a Simon design, a two-stage design for a binary outcome trial.
Two possible occurrences for a two-stage trial: stopping at stage one (top) and stopping at stage two (bottom) Group sequential design example - possible realisations.png
Two possible occurrences for a two-stage trial: stopping at stage one (top) and stopping at stage two (bottom)
An example of a three-stage group sequential design, shown in terms of the test statistic. Group sequential design example - test statistic.png
An example of a three-stage group sequential design, shown in terms of the test statistic.

Usage

The adaptive design method developed mainly in the early 21st century. [2] In November 2019, the US Food and Drug Administration provided guidelines for using adaptive designs in clinical trials. [3]

In April 2020, the World Health Organization published an "R&D Blueprint (for the) novel Coronavirus" (Blueprint). The Blueprint documented a "large, international, multi-site, individually randomized controlled clinical trial" to allow "the concurrent evaluation of the benefits and risks of each promising candidate vaccine within 3–6 months of it being made available for the trial." The Blueprint listed a Global Target Product Profile (TPP) for COVID‑19, identifying favorable attributes of safe and effective vaccines under two broad categories: "vaccines for the long-term protection of people at higher risk of COVID-19, such as healthcare workers", and other vaccines to provide rapid-response immunity for new outbreaks. [22]

The international TPP team was formed to 1) assess the development of the most promising candidate vaccines; 2) map candidate vaccines and their clinical trial worldwide, publishing a frequently-updated "landscape" of vaccines in development; [23] 3) rapidly evaluate and screen for the most promising candidate vaccines simultaneously before they are tested in humans; and 4) design and coordinate a multiple-site, international randomized controlled trial  –the "Solidarity trial" for vaccines [22] [24]  –to enable simultaneous evaluation of the benefits and risks of different vaccine candidates under clinical trials in countries where there are high rates of COVID‑19 disease, ensuring fast interpretation and sharing of results around the world. [22] The WHO vaccine coalition will prioritize which vaccines should go into Phase II and III clinical trials, and determine harmonized Phase III protocols for all vaccines achieving the pivotal trial stage. [22]

The global "Solidarity" and European "Discovery" trials of hospitalized people with severe COVID‑19 infection apply adaptive design to rapidly alter trial parameters as results from the four experimental therapeutic strategies emerge. [25] [26] [27] [28] The US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) initiated an adaptive design, international Phase III trial (called "ACTT") to involve up to 800 hospitalized COVID‑19 people at 100 sites in multiple countries. [29]

Breast cancer

An adaptive trial design enabled two experimental breast cancer drugs to deliver promising results after just six months of testing, far shorter than usual. Researchers assessed the results while the trial was in process and found that cancer had been eradicated in more than half of one group of patients. The trial, known as I-Spy 2, tested 12 experimental drugs. [6]

I-SPY 1

For its predecessor I-SPY 1, 10 cancer centers and the National Cancer Institute (NCI SPORE program and the NCI Cooperative groups) collaborated to identify response indicators that would best predict survival for women with high-risk breast cancer. During 2002–2006, the study monitored 237 patients undergoing neoadjuvant therapy before surgery. Iterative MRI and tissue samples monitored the biology of patients to chemotherapy given in a neoadjuvant setting, or presurgical setting. Evaluating chemotherapy's direct impact on tumor tissue took much less time than monitoring outcomes in thousands of patients over long time periods. The approach helped to standardize the imaging and tumor sampling processes, and led to miniaturized assays. Key findings included that tumor response was a good predictor of patient survival, and that tumor shrinkage during treatment was a good predictor of long-term outcome. Importantly, the vast majority of tumors identified as high risk by molecular signature. However, heterogeneity within this group of women and measuring response within tumor subtypes was more informative than viewing the group as a whole. Within genetic signatures, level of response to treatment appears to be a reasonable predictor of outcome. Additionally, its shared database has furthered the understanding of drug response and generated new targets and agents for subsequent testing. [30]

I-SPY 2

I-SPY 2 is an adaptive clinical trial of multiple Phase 2 treatment regimens combined with standard chemotherapy. I-SPY 2 linked 19 academic cancer centers, two community centers, the FDA, the NCI, pharmaceutical and biotech companies, patient advocates and philanthropic partners. The trial is sponsored by the Biomarker Consortium of the Foundation for the NIH (FNIH), and is co-managed by the FNIH and QuantumLeap Healthcare Collaborative. I-SPY 2 was designed to explore the hypothesis that different combinations of cancer therapies have varying degrees of success for different patients. Conventional clinical trials that evaluate post-surgical tumor response require a separate trial with long intervals and large populations to test each combination. Instead, I-SPY 2 is organized as a continuous process. It efficiently evaluates multiple therapy regimes by relying on the predictors developed in I-SPY 1 that help quickly determine whether patients with a particular genetic signature will respond to a given treatment regime. The trial is adaptive in that the investigators learn as they go, and do not continue treatments that appear to be ineffective. All patients are categorized based on tissue and imaging markers collected early and iteratively (a patient's markers may change over time) throughout the trial, so that early insights can guide treatments for later patients. Treatments that show positive effects for a patient group can be ushered to confirmatory clinical trials, while those that do not can be rapidly sidelined. Importantly, confirmatory trials can serve as a pathway for FDA Accelerated Approval. I-SPY 2 can simultaneously evaluate candidates developed by multiple companies, escalating or eliminating drugs based on immediate results. Using a single standard arm for comparison for all candidates in the trial saves significant costs over individual Phase 3 trials. All data are shared across the industry. [30] As of January 2016 I-SPY 2 is comparing 11 new treatments against 'standard therapy', and is estimated to complete in Sept 2017. [31] By mid 2016 several treatments had been selected for later stage trials. [32]

Alzheimer's

Researchers plan to use an adaptive trial design to help speed development of Alzheimer's disease treatments, with a budget of 53 million euros. The first trial under the initiative was expected to begin in 2015 and to involve about a dozen companies. [6]


Bayesian designs

The adjustable nature of adaptive trials inherently suggests the use of Bayesian statistical analysis. Bayesian statistics inherently address updating information such as that seen in adaptive trials that change from updated information derived from interim analysis. The problem of adaptive clinical trial design is more or less exactly the bandit problem as studied in the field of reinforcement learning.

According to FDA guidelines, an adaptive Bayesian clinical trial can involve: [33]

The Bayesian framework Continuous Individualized Risk Index which is based on dynamic measurements from cancer patients can be effectively used for adaptive trial designs. Platform trials rely heavily on Bayesian designs.

Statistical analysis

The problem of adaptive clinical trial design is more or less exactly the bandit problem as studied in the field of reinforcement learning.

Added complexity

The logistics of managing traditional, non-adaptive design clinical trials may be complex. In adaptive design clinical trials, adapting the design as results arrive adds to the complexity of design, monitoring, drug supply, data capture and randomization. [7] Furthermore, it should be stated in the trial's protocol exactly what kind of adaptation will be permitted. [2] Publishing the trial protocol in advance increases the validity of the final results, as it makes clear that any adaptation that took place during the trial was planned, rather than ad hoc. According to PCAST "One approach is to focus studies on specific subsets of patients most likely to benefit, identified based on validated biomarkers. In some cases, using appropriate biomarkers can make it possible to dramatically decrease the sample size required to achieve statistical significance—for example, from 1500 to 50 patients." [34]

Adaptive designs have added statistical complexity compared to traditional clinical trial designs. For example, any multiple testing, either from looking at multiple treatment arms or from looking at a single treatment arm multiple times, must be accounted for. Another example is statistical bias, which can be more likely when using adaptive designs, and again must be accounted for.

While an adaptive design may be an improvement over a non-adaptive design in some respects (for example, expected sample size), it is not always the case that an adaptive design is a better choice overall: in some cases, the added complexity of the adaptive design may not justify its benefits. An example of this is when the trial is based on a measurement that takes a long time to observe, as this would mean having an interim analysis when many participants have started treatment but cannot yet contribute to the interim results. [35]

Risks

Shorter trials may not reveal longer term risks, such as a cancer's return. [6]

Resources (external links)

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Clinical trial</span> Phase of clinical research in medicine

Clinical trials are prospective biomedical or behavioral research studies on human participants designed to answer specific questions about biomedical or behavioral interventions, including new treatments and known interventions that warrant further study and comparison. Clinical trials generate data on dosage, safety and efficacy. They are conducted only after they have received health authority/ethics committee approval in the country where approval of the therapy is sought. These authorities are responsible for vetting the risk/benefit ratio of the trial—their approval does not mean the therapy is 'safe' or effective, only that the trial may be conducted.

A cancer vaccine, or oncovaccine, is a vaccine that either treats existing cancer or prevents development of cancer. Vaccines that treat existing cancer are known as therapeutic cancer vaccines or tumor antigen vaccines. Some of the vaccines are "autologous", being prepared from samples taken from the patient, and are specific to that patient.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Cancer immunotherapy</span> Artificial stimulation of the immune system to treat cancer

Cancer immunotherapy (immuno-oncotherapy) is the stimulation of the immune system to treat cancer, improving the immune system's natural ability to fight the disease. It is an application of the fundamental research of cancer immunology (immuno-oncology) and a growing subspecialty of oncology.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Drug development</span> Process of bringing a new pharmaceutical drug to the market

Drug development is the process of bringing a new pharmaceutical drug to the market once a lead compound has been identified through the process of drug discovery. It includes preclinical research on microorganisms and animals, filing for regulatory status, such as via the United States Food and Drug Administration for an investigational new drug to initiate clinical trials on humans, and may include the step of obtaining regulatory approval with a new drug application to market the drug. The entire process—from concept through preclinical testing in the laboratory to clinical trial development, including Phase I–III trials—to approved vaccine or drug typically takes more than a decade.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ipilimumab</span> Pharmaceutical drug

Ipilimumab, sold under the brand name Yervoy, is a monoclonal antibody medication that works to activate the immune system by targeting CTLA-4, a protein receptor that downregulates the immune system.

Leronlimab is a humanized monoclonal antibody targeted against the CCR5 receptor found on T lymphocytes of the human immune system. It is being investigated as a potential therapy in the treatment of COVID-19, triple negative breast cancer, and HIV infection. The United States Food and Drug Administration has designated PRO 140 for fast-track approval. In February 2008, the drug entered Phase 2 clinical trials and a phase 3 trial was begun in 2015. In February 2018, Cytodyn Inc reported that the primary endpoint had been achieved in the PRO 140 pivotal combination therapy trial in HIV infection. In 2020 CytoDyn submitted a fast-track biologics license application for treatment of CCR5-tropic HIV-1 Infection.

Treatment of lung cancer refers to the use of medical therapies, such as surgery, radiation, chemotherapy, immunotherapy, percutaneous ablation, and palliative care, alone or in combination, in an attempt to cure or lessen the adverse impact of malignant neoplasms originating in lung tissue.

Pelareorep is a proprietary isolate of the unmodified human reovirus being developed as a systemically administered immuno-oncological viral agent for the treatment of solid tumors and hematological malignancies. Pelareorep is an oncolytic virus, which means that it preferentially lyses cancer cells. Pelareorep also promotes an inflamed tumor phenotype through innate and adaptive immune responses. Preliminary clinical trials indicate that it may have anti-cancer effects across a variety of cancer types when administered alone and in combination with other cancer therapies.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Phases of clinical research</span> Clinical trial stages using human subjects

The phases of clinical research are the stages in which scientists conduct experiments with a health intervention to obtain sufficient evidence for a process considered effective as a medical treatment. For drug development, the clinical phases start with testing for drug safety in a few human subjects, then expand to many study participants to determine if the treatment is effective. Clinical research is conducted on drug candidates, vaccine candidates, new medical devices, and new diagnostic assays.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Pembrolizumab</span> Pharmaceutical drug used in cancer treatment

Pembrolizumab, sold under the brand name Keytruda, is a humanized antibody used in cancer immunotherapy that treats melanoma, lung cancer, head and neck cancer, Hodgkin lymphoma, stomach cancer, cervical cancer, and certain types of breast cancer. It is administered by slow intravenous injection.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sonidegib</span> Chemical compound

Sonidegib (INN), sold under the brand name Odomzo, is a medication used to treat cancer.

PROSTVAC is a cancer immunotherapy candidate in clinical development by Bavarian Nordic for the treatment of all prostate cancer although clinical trials are focusing on more advanced cases of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). PROSTVAC is a vaccine designed to enable the immune system to recognize and attack prostate cancer cells by triggering a specific and targeted T cell immune response to cancer cells that express the tumor-associated antigen prostate-specific antigen (PSA).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Isatuximab</span> Monoclonal antibody

Isatuximab, sold under the brand name Sarclisa, is a monoclonal antibody (mAb) medication for the treatment of multiple myeloma.

The immune-related response criteria (irRC) is a set of published rules that define when tumors in cancer patients improve ("respond"), stay the same ("stabilize"), or worsen ("progress") during treatment, where the compound being evaluated is an immuno-oncology drug. Immuno-oncology, part of the broader field of cancer immunotherapy, involves agents which harness the body's own immune system to fight cancer. Traditionally, patient responses to new cancer treatments have been evaluated using two sets of criteria, the WHO criteria and the response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST). The immune-related response criteria, first published in 2009, arose out of observations that immuno-oncology drugs would fail in clinical trials that measured responses using the WHO or RECIST Criteria, because these criteria could not account for the time gap in many patients between initial treatment and the apparent action of the immune system to reduce the tumor burden.

Tonix Pharmaceuticals is a pharmaceutical company based in Chatham, New Jersey that focuses on repurposed drugs for central nervous system conditions and as of 2020 was also pursuing a vaccine for COVID-19 and a biodefense project.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sotorasib</span> Chemical compound

Sotorasib, sold under the brand names Lumakras and Lumykras, is an anti-cancer medication used to treat non-small-cell lung cancer. It targets a specific mutation, G12C, in the protein K-Ras encoded by gene KRAS which is responsible for various forms of cancer. Sotorasib is an inhibitor of the RAS GTPase family.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">COVID-19 drug development</span> Preventative and therapeutic medications for COVID-19 infection

COVID-19 drug development is the research process to develop preventative therapeutic prescription drugs that would alleviate the severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). From early 2020 through 2021, several hundred drug companies, biotechnology firms, university research groups, and health organizations were developing therapeutic candidates for COVID-19 disease in various stages of preclinical or clinical research, with 419 potential COVID-19 drugs in clinical trials, as of April 2021.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Solidarity trial</span> Accelerated multinational clinical trial program to identify therapies against COVID-19

The Solidarity trial for treatments is a multinational Phase III-IV clinical trial organized by the World Health Organization (WHO) and partners to compare four untested treatments for hospitalized people with severe COVID-19 illness. The trial was announced 18 March 2020, and as of 6 August 2021, 12,000 patients in 30 countries had been recruited to participate in the trial.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Epitopoietic Research Corporation</span> Belgian pharmaceutical company developing brain cancer treatments

Epitopoietic Research Corporation (ERC) is a Belgian Pharmaceutical company that is specialized in the development of ERC1671, a treatment for Glioblastoma multiforme, which is the most aggressive form of brain cancer. In 2019 ERC provided treatment under the US Federal Right-to-try law.

A platform trial is a type of prospective, disease-focused, adaptive, randomized clinical trial (RCT) that compares multiple, simultaneous and possibly differently-timed interventions against a single, constant control group. As a disease-focused trial design, platform trials attempt to answer the question "which therapy will best treat this disease". Platform trials are unique in their utilization of both: a common control group and their opportunity to alter the therapies it investigates during its active enrollment phase. Platform trials commonly take advantage of Bayesian statistics, but may incorporate elements of frequentist statistics and/or machine learning.

References

  1. ↑ "What are adaptive clinical trials?" (video). youtube.com. Medical Research Council Biostatistics Unit. 17 November 2022.
  2. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Pallmann P, Bedding AW, Choodari-Oskooei B, Dimairo M, Flight L, Hampson LV, et al. (February 2018). "Adaptive designs in clinical trials: why use them, and how to run and report them". BMC Medicine. 16 (1): 29. doi: 10.1186/s12916-018-1017-7 . PMC   5830330 . PMID   29490655.
  3. 1 2 "Adaptive designs for clinical trials of drugs and biologics: Guidance for industry". U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). 1 November 2019. Archived from the original on 13 December 2019. Retrieved 3 April 2020.
  4. ↑ Brennan 2013.
  5. 1 2 3 4 5 6 "PANDA website" . Retrieved 4 May 2022.
  6. 1 2 3 4 5 Wang, Shirley S. (30 December 2013). "Health: Scientists Look to Improve Cost and Time of Drug Trials - WSJ.com". Online.wsj.com. Archived from the original on 14 March 2016. Retrieved 4 January 2014.
  7. 1 2 3 "Adaptive Clinical Trials for Overcoming Research Challenges". News-medical.net. 16 September 2013. Retrieved 4 January 2014.
  8. ↑ President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology 2012, p. xiii.
  9. ↑ Research, Center for Drug Evaluation and (21 April 2020). "Adaptive Design Clinical Trials for Drugs and Biologics Guidance for Industry". U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Retrieved 19 April 2022.
  10. ↑ Bothwell, Laura E; Avorn, Jerry; Khan, Nazleen F; Kesselheim, Aaron S (10 February 2018). "Adaptive design clinical trials: a review of the literature and ClinicalTrials.gov". BMJ Open. 8 (2): e018320. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2017-018320. ISSN   2044-6055. PMC   5829673 . PMID   29440155.
  11. ↑ Pallmann, Philip; Bedding, Alun W.; Choodari-Oskooei, Babak; Dimairo, Munyaradzi; Flight, Laura; Hampson, Lisa V.; Holmes, Jane; Mander, Adrian P.; Odondi, Lang’o; Sydes, Matthew R.; Villar, Sofía S. (December 2018). "Adaptive designs in clinical trials: why use them, and how to run and report them". BMC Medicine. 16 (1): 29. doi: 10.1186/s12916-018-1017-7 . ISSN   1741-7015. PMC   5830330 . PMID   29490655.
  12. ↑ Bowalekar, Suresh (2011). "Adaptive designs in clinical trials". Perspectives in Clinical Research. 2 (1): 23–27. doi: 10.4103/2229-3485.76286 . ISSN   2229-3485. PMC   3088952 . PMID   21584178.
  13. ↑ Van Norman GA (June 2019). "Phase II trials in drug development and adaptive trial design". JACC. Basic to Translational Science. 4 (3): 428–437. doi:10.1016/j.jacbts.2019.02.005. PMC   6609997 . PMID   31312766.
  14. ↑ Sato A, Shimura M, Gosho M (April 2018). "Practical characteristics of adaptive design in Phase 2 and 3 clinical trials". Journal of Clinical Pharmacy and Therapeutics. 43 (2): 170–180. doi: 10.1111/jcpt.12617 . PMID   28850685. S2CID   3704071.
  15. ↑ Storer, Barry E. (1989). "Design and Analysis of Phase I Clinical Trials". Biometrics. 45 (3): 925–937. doi:10.2307/2531693. JSTOR   2531693. PMID   2790129.
  16. ↑ Adaptive Designs Working Group of the MRC Network of Hubs for Trials Methodology Research. "A quick guide why not to use A+B designs" (PDF). MRC Network of Hubs for Trials Methodology Research. Retrieved 5 August 2022.
  17. ↑ Wheeler, Graham M.; Mander, Adrian P.; Bedding, Alun; Brock, Kristian; Cornelius, Victoria; Grieve, Andrew P.; Jaki, Thomas; Love, Sharon B.; Odondi, Lang'o; Weir, Christopher J.; Yap, Christina; Bond, Simon J. (2019). "How to design a dose-finding study using the continual reassessment method". BMC Medical Research Methodology. 19 (1): 18. doi: 10.1186/s12874-018-0638-z . PMC   6339349 . PMID   30658575.
  18. ↑ Jaki, Thomas; Clive, Sally; Weir, Christopher J. (2013). "Principles of dose finding studies in cancer: A comparison of trial designs". Cancer Chemotherapy and Pharmacology. 71 (5): 1107–1114. doi:10.1007/s00280-012-2059-8. PMC   3636432 . PMID   23299793.
  19. ↑ Iasonos, Alexia; Wilton, Andrew S.; Riedel, Elyn R.; Seshan, Venkatraman E.; Spriggs, David R. (2008). "A comprehensive comparison of the continual reassessment method to the standard 3 + 3 dose escalation scheme in Phase I dose-finding studies". Clinical Trials. 5 (5): 465–477. doi:10.1177/1740774508096474. PMC   2637378 . PMID   18827039.
  20. ↑ Simon, Richard (1989). "Optimal two-stage designs for phase II clinical trials". Controlled Clinical Trials. 10 (1): 1–10. doi:10.1016/0197-2456(89)90015-9. PMID   2702835.
  21. ↑ Mander, A.P.; Thompson, S.G. (2010). "Two-stage designs optimal under the alternative hypothesis for phase II cancer clinical trials". Contemporary Clinical Trials. 31 (6): 572–578. doi:10.1016/j.cct.2010.07.008. PMC   3049867 . PMID   20678585.
  22. 1 2 3 4 "Update on WHO Solidarity Trial – Accelerating a safe and effective COVID-19 vaccine". World Health Organization. 27 April 2020. Archived from the original on 30 April 2020. Retrieved 2 May 2020. It is vital that we evaluate as many vaccines as possible as we cannot predict how many will turn out to be viable. To increase the chances of success (given the high level of attrition during vaccine development), we must test all candidate vaccines until they fail. [The] WHO is working to ensure that all of them have the chance of being tested at the initial stage of development. The results for the efficacy of each vaccine are expected within three to six months and this evidence, combined with data on safety, will inform decisions about whether it can be used on a wider scale.
  23. ↑ "Draft landscape of COVID 19 candidate vaccines". World Health Organization. 3 September 2020. Archived from the original on 30 April 2020. Retrieved 3 September 2020.
  24. ↑ "An international randomised trial of candidate vaccines against COVID-19: Outline of Solidarity vaccine trial" (PDF). World Health Organization. 9 April 2020. Archived (PDF) from the original on 12 May 2020. Retrieved 9 May 2020.
  25. ↑ COVID-19 Clinical Research Coalition (April 2020). "Global coalition to accelerate COVID-19 clinical research in resource-limited settings". Lancet. 395 (10233): 1322–1325. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(20)30798-4 . PMC   7270833 . PMID   32247324.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
  26. ↑ Li G, De Clercq E (March 2020). "Therapeutic options for the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV)". Nature Reviews. Drug Discovery. 19 (3): 149–150. doi: 10.1038/d41573-020-00016-0 . PMID   32127666.
  27. ↑ Dhama K, Sharun K, Tiwari R, Dadar M, Malik YS, Singh KP, Chaicumpa W (March 2020). "COVID-19, an emerging coronavirus infection: advances and prospects in designing and developing vaccines, immunotherapeutics, and therapeutics". Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics. 16 (6): 1232–1238. doi: 10.1080/21645515.2020.1735227 . PMC   7103671 . PMID   32186952.
  28. ↑ "Launch of a European clinical trial against COVID-19". INSERM. 22 March 2020. Retrieved 5 April 2020. The great strength of this trial is its "adaptive" nature. This means that ineffective experimental treatments can very quickly be dropped and replaced by other molecules that emerge from research efforts. We will therefore be able to make changes in real time, in line with the most recent scientific data, in order to find the best treatment for our patients
  29. ↑ Clinical trial number NCT04280705 for "Adaptive COVID-19 Treatment Trial (ACTT)" at ClinicalTrials.gov
  30. 1 2 President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology 2012, p. 21-22.
  31. ↑ I-SPY 2 TRIAL: Neoadjuvant and Personalized Adaptive Novel Agents to Treat Breast Cancer
  32. ↑ Novel Agents are Targeting Drivers of TNBC - Several drug candidates in I-SPY2 have 'graduated' to later-phase studies. June 2016
  33. ↑ Spiegelhalter 2010, p. 3.
  34. ↑ President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology 2012, p. 21.
  35. ↑ Wason, James M. S.; Brocklehurst, Peter; Yap, Christina (2019). "When to keep it simple – adaptive designs are not always useful". BMC Medicine. 17 (1): 152. doi: 10.1186/s12916-019-1391-9 . PMC   6676635 . PMID   31370839.

Sources

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.