1 / 9

Case Studies in Modeling and Simulation

Case Studies in Modeling and Simulation. Discussion Stella G. Machado, Ph.D. Office of Biostatistics/OTS/CDER/FDA FDA/Industry Workshop, September 2006. Regulatory issue. Approval was sought for monotherapy for pediatric population, without another clinical trial

kaethe
Télécharger la présentation

Case Studies in Modeling and Simulation

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. Case Studies in Modeling and Simulation Discussion Stella G. Machado, Ph.D. Office of Biostatistics/OTS/CDER/FDA FDA/Industry Workshop, September 2006

  2. Regulatory issue • Approval was sought for monotherapy for pediatric population, without another clinical trial • Clinical trial data for Drug X: • Adults: adjunct and monotherapy • Pediatric population: adjunct • PK/PD modeling used for bridging the adjunct therapy data (data masked)

  3. Bridging PK/PD Studies • General method comparing PK/PD response curves in: Pediatric versus Adult populations • Different Regions • Exposure: dose, AUC, Cmin, etc • Response: biomarkers, clinical endpoints • Goal is to evaluate similarity in PK/PD relationships between 2 populations • Conclude: similarity, similarity with some dose regimen modification; lack of similarity

  4. DRUG X: PK/PD scatter plot with loess fits

  5. STEPS IN THE STATISTICAL APPROACH • assess similarity between responses at all concentrations likely to be encountered • account for variability of the response • need “Equivalence” type approach, not hypothesis tests showing that the responses are not significantly different • analysis is more “exploratory” than “confirmatory”

  6. Usual equivalence-type analysis: “similarity” defined as requirement that average responses in the 2 populations, at the same C, are closely similar: choose reference “goalposts” L and U, eg 80% to 125% calculate 95% confidence interval for ratio of average responses (1 / 0) for “all” C Steps

  7. EXAMPLE: Drug X • Response transformed by square root to stabilize the variance • Linear models fitted separately for the two populations: • sqrt(response) = a + b * Conc +  • For each C, 5000 pairs of studies generated  5000 estimates of 1/0, and percentiles

  8. DRUG X: 95% CI’s for ratios 1/0 for concentrations: 0, 20,50,70,90 via model-based method

  9. Remarks for example • Response higher for pediatric population for concentrations above 50mg =>Shows lack of similarity, but dose adjustment would be possible if high concentrations are called for • Limits of (80, 125) might not be medically most sensible for interpretation in each situation

More Related