论文标题
无缝阶段2-3设计:减少剂量优化样本量的有用策略
Seamless Phase 2-3 Design: A Useful Strategy to Reduce the Sample Size for Dose Optimization
论文作者
论文摘要
基于细胞毒性化学治疗剂开发的传统剂量选择范式在应用于新型分子靶向剂(例如激酶抑制剂,单核抗体和抗体抗体抗体抗体抗体)时,通常会出现问题。美国食品药品监督管理局(FDA)启动了Optimus项目,以改革肿瘤学药物开发中的剂量优化和剂量选择范式,并呼吁更多关注利益风险的考虑。 我们系统地研究了无缝阶段2-3设计作为剂量优化的策略的工作特性,其中1(对应于第2阶段)患者被随机分为多种剂量,有或没有对照。在第2阶段(对应于第3阶段)中,通过随机并发控制或历史控制评估所选最佳剂量的功效。根据是否包括并发控制以及第1阶段和第2阶段使用的端点的类型,我们描述了四种无缝的2-3阶段2-3剂量优化设计,这些设计适用于不同的临床环境。讨论了与剂量优化有关的统计和设计考虑。仿真表明,剂量优化阶段2-3阶段的设计能够控制I型错误率,并产生与常规方法相比,样本量大得多的适当统计功率。样本量节省的价格从16.6%到27.3%,具体取决于设计和方案,平均节省为22.1%。由于临时剂量选择,第2-3阶段的剂量优化设计在逻辑和操作上更具挑战性,应仔细计划和实施以确保试验完整性。
The traditional more-is-better dose selection paradigm, developed based on cytotoxic chemotherapeutics, is often problematic When applied to the development of novel molecularly targeted agents (e.g., kinase inhibitors, monoclonal antibodies, and antibody-drug conjugates). The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) initiated Project Optimus to reform the dose optimization and dose selection paradigm in oncology drug development and call for more attention to benefit-risk consideration. We systematically investigated the operating characteristics of the seamless phase 2-3 design as a strategy for dose optimization, where in stage 1 (corresponding to phase 2) patients are randomized to multiple doses, with or without a control; and in stage 2 (corresponding to phase 3) the efficacy of the selected optimal dose is evaluated with a randomized concurrent control or historical control. Depending on whether the concurrent control is included and the type of endpoints used in stages 1 and 2, we describe four types of seamless phase 2-3 dose-optimization designs, which are suitable for different clinical settings. The statistical and design considerations that pertain to dose optimization are discussed. Simulation shows that dose optimization phase 2-3 designs are able to control the familywise type I error rates and yield appropriate statistical power with substantially smaller sample size than the conventional approach. The sample size savings range from 16.6% to 27.3%, depending on the design and scenario, with a mean savings of 22.1%. Due to the interim dose selection, the phase 2-3 dose-optimization design is logistically and operationally more challenging, and should be carefully planned and implemented to ensure trial integrity.