1 / 28

Statistical Issues in Trial Reporting: Revised US FDA Regulations

Statistical Issues in Trial Reporting: Revised US FDA Regulations. David L DeMets, PhD Department of Biostatistics & Medical Informatics University of Wisconsin-Madison. Topics. 1. Clintrials.gov 2. Adverse Event Reporting 3. T2D Trial Design

hanne
Télécharger la présentation

Statistical Issues in Trial Reporting: Revised US FDA Regulations

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Statistical Issues in Trial Reporting: Revised US FDA Regulations David L DeMets, PhD Department of Biostatistics & Medical Informatics University of Wisconsin-Madison

  2. Topics • 1. Clintrials.gov • 2. Adverse Event Reporting • 3. T2D Trial Design • 4. New Public Access to Data / White House Request

  3. Clinical Trial Registries • For most of the past 50 years, it was difficult to know what trials were being done or had been done • True for NIH & industry sponsored trials • Information was by “word of mouth” • Concerns mostly about negative (ie neutral or harmful) results not being published • Both academia & industry run trials

  4. Clintrials.gov • As a result, clintrials.gov was established • US requires that all trials, regardless of sponsor, be registered (federal, industry, local) • US also requires results of completed trials be registered • Ref: FDA Amendments Act (FDAAA-801) • Sponsor or Principal Investigator are responsible for registration

  5. Clintrials.gov (2) • Eligible for registration • Initiated after Sept 27, 2007 or still ongoing on Dec 26, 2007 • Trials of drugs, biologics & devices • One or more sites in the US • Trials under FDA IND or IDE • There are exclusions • Phase I trials • Small feasibility trials • Non interventional studies

  6. Clintrials.gov(3) • Deadlines for trial registration • Not later than 21 days after first patient • Deadline for trial results • Not later than 12 months after trial completed • NIH must certify compliance for funded trials • Sponsors must certify compliance with their submissions

  7. Clintrials.gov (4) • Penalties for non compliance • Fines • Withholding of grant funding • Compliance track record (informal) • Industry mostly compliant • Academic investigators not fully compliant, as yet • NIH working on procedures

  8. Clintrials.gov (5)Registration • Documents to be registered • “Protocol” • Data Elements • Title & Anacronym • Sponsor • Who is responsible • IRB Review • Data Monitoring Committee? • Oversight Authority (FDA, NIH, IRB?) • ….

  9. Clintrials.gov (6)Results To Be Filed • Similar to a NEJM/JAMA/Lancet paper • Patient Flow • Baseline profile • Outcome measures (primary, secondary) • Adverse events • Statistical Analysis • Start & stop dates • Etc • …..

  10. Clintrials.gov (7)2013 Facts • 140,000 studies registered • 40% US only, 40% Non US Only • 80% Registered Studies Interventional • 78000 Drug or biologic • 28000 Behavioral • 8600 Studies with Results • 8000 interventional (90%)

  11. Public Access to Trial Data • US Congress / White House putting pressure to make trial data available, especially trials funded by government • Allow additional analyses……. • Some sponsors already doing this or working towards that goal • NIH has made some trial data available • Not as easy to do as some think

  12. Clinical Trial Transformation Initiative (CTTI) • Cost of trials increasing dramatically, especially in the US, can’t be sustained • More trials are going off US shore • Need to streamline trials, maintain quality but reduce costs • CTTI is a consortium of NIH, FDA, industry and academia • Initiated by Duke Clinical Research Institute (DCRI) and FDA • Selected projects

  13. CTTI ProjectsTwo early examples • SAE Reports • Copies from a trial shipped to all participating sites • Not unblinded & so not useful to sites • Not required by federal regulations • A costly tradition, not very informative • Use DSMB process • CRF Complete Auditing • Line by line on site auditing by CRA’s • Very costly • Two natural experiments suggest errors in NIH type approach small • GUSTO • Breast Cancer Trial / Montreal Site Fraud

  14. Safety ReportingStandard Coding Systems • Several adverse event coding systems • Often organized by body systems • Subcategorized into events as reported by investigator/patient • Safety committees often review these in tabular form by treatment arms • (AE listings not helpful after awhile)

  15. Serious Adverse Event (SAE) Reporting • Historical approach (report everything) caused regulatory SAE drowning • Many AEs part of disease process • Others common in general population • Not a useful or efficient approach • March 2011, FDA altered safety reporting rules – New IND Rule • Challenge to distinguish between common AEs in population and those associated with treatment

  16. SAE Reporting (2) • Goal: reduce the number of uninformative SAE case reports submitted • New IND rule: • Report only Serious, Unexpected Suspected Adverse Reactions (SUSARs) • Suspected adverse reaction: reasonable possibility of causality, suggestive evidence • Places responsibility on sponsor to determine SUSAR rather than investigator

  17. SAE Reporting (3) • May be a SUSAR if • (A) A single occurrence of an uncommon but strongly causal association AE (eg Stevens-Johnson syndrome) • (B) One or more occurrences of event not commonly associated with drug, biologic • (C) An aggregate analysis of a specific event in a CT (concurrent or historical) observed more frequently on drug than control

  18. SAE Reporting (4) • Sponsors should develop a global “firewalled” safety committee • Aggregate analysis of total data on investigational product • SAEs, relevant lab data • Aggregate analysis • A meta-analysis from completed studies • In special cases, unmasked data from ongoing trials • No adjustment for multiplicity needed • Likely to identify false positives

  19. SAE Reporting (5) • Requires sponsors to develop process to unblind cases but • Avoid unblinding of study team • Maintain integrity of data and trial • Review ongoing and completed trials • Compare Suspected Adverse Reactions between drug and control

  20. AE Reporting (6) • Sponsors working to develop Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) to deal with the new IND Rule • Too early to tell how successful new process is • Probably moving in the right direction but …….

  21. Type II Diabetes (T2D) New Paradigm • Some celebrated cases of Type II diabetes drugs (eg rosiglitazone) had increased CV risk (CV Death, MI, Stroke) • A new paradigm for approval of diabetes drug issued by FDA • Assume new drug lowers HbA1c • A two step process • Rule out CV RR of 1.8 for initial approval • Rule out CV RR of 1.3 for final approval

  22. T2D Paradigm (2)Rationale • Rule out excess CV events/1000 pt yrs • Rule out if : RR Upper 97.5% CI < 1.8, RR Upper 97.5% CI <1.3 • To rule out RR of 1.8 • 120 events needed • To rule out RR of 1.3 • 600 events needed • 6000 patient 5 year trial • Estimated CV RR < 1.1

  23. T2D Paradigm (3)Two Scenarios • Twoseparate trials • First trial rules out CV RR of 1.8, drug submitted for approval • Second trial designed then to rule out CV RR of 1.3 • Failure of second trial, or failure to do second trial could result in removal • One single trial • When trial rules out CV RR of 1.8, submit data for regulatory approval • Continue trial to rule out CV RR of 1.3

  24. T2D Paradigm (4)Issues • Two trial approach • First scenario of two separate trials pose no logistical, ethical problems • Participants in second trial may be different • One trial approach • When CV RR of 1.8 is ruled out, data are submitted for regulatory approval • At the FDA, this data must be made public when given approval • Essentially publishing interim results – will trial continue or remain compliant?

  25. T2D Paradigm (5)One trial scenario • Public release of interim data may affect • Recruitment • Patient profile of new patients entered • Patient compliance to assigned treatment • Patient assessment of benefit & risk • Experience from cancer trials • Places DMC in a challenging position • Typically do not release interim data until trial is over or results very convincing • Want to protect overall integrity of the trial

  26. T2D Paradigm (6)One trial scenario • Neither sponsors or regulators (eg FDA) have found an ideal solution • Several trials underway using this paradigm of a single trial • Some already submitted for drug approval • Not clear of the impact on the continuing “1.3 RR” portion of the trial

  27. Questions

More Related