Bayesian Adaptive Designs for Early Phase Clinical Trials

My dissertation focuses mainly on Bayesian adaptive designs for phase I and phase II clinical trials. It includes three specific topics: (1) proposing a novel two-dimensional dose-finding algorithm for biological agents, (2) developing Bayesian adaptive screening designs to provide more efficient and ethical clinical trials, and (3) incorporating missing late-onset responses to make an early stopping decision. Treating patients with novel biological agents is becoming a leading trend in oncology. Unlike cytotoxic agents, for which toxicity and efficacy monotonically increase with dose, biological agents may exhibit non-monotonic patterns in their dose-response relationships. Using a trial with two biological agents as an example, we propose a phase I/II trial design to identify the biologically optimal dose combination (BODC), which is defined as the dose combination of the two agents with the highest efficacy and tolerable toxicity. A change-point model is used to reflect the fact that the dose-toxicity surface of the combinational agents may plateau at higher dose levels, and a flexible logistic model is proposed to accommodate the possible non-monotonic pattern for the dose-efficacy relationship. During the trial, we continuously update the posterior estimates of toxicity and efficacy and assign patients to the most appropriate dose combination. We propose a novel dose-finding algorithm to encourage sufficient exploration of untried dose combinations in the two-dimensional space. Extensive simulation studies show that the proposed design has desirable operating characteristics in identifying the BODC under various patterns of dose-toxicity and dose-efficacy relationships. Trials of combination therapies for the treatment of cancer are playing an increasingly important role in the battle against this disease. To more efficiently handle the large number of combination therapies that must be tested, we propose a novel Bayesian phase II adaptive screening design to simultaneously select among possible treatment combinations involving multiple agents. Our design is based on formulating the selection procedure as a Bayesian hypothesis testing problem in which the superiority of each treatment combination is equated to a single hypothesis. During the trial conduct, we use the current values of the posterior probabilities of all hypotheses to adaptively allocate patients to treatment combinations. Simulation studies show that the proposed design substantially outperforms the conventional multi-arm balanced factorial trial design. The proposed design yields a significantly higher probability for selecting the best treatment while at the same time allocating substantially more patients to efficacious treatments. The proposed design is most appropriate for the trials combining multiple agents and screening out the efficacious combination to be further investigated. The proposed Bayesian adaptive phase II screening design substantially outperformed the conventional complete factorial design. Our design allocates more patients to better treatments while at the same time providing higher power to identify the best treatment at the end of the trial. Phase II trial studies usually are single-arm trials which are conducted to test the efficacy of experimental agents and decide whether agents are promising to be sent to phase III trials. Interim monitoring is employed to stop the trial early for futility to avoid assigning unacceptable number of patients to inferior treatments. We propose a Bayesian single-arm phase II design with continuous monitoring for estimating the response rate of the experimental drug. To address the issue of late-onset responses, we use a piece-wise exponential model to estimate the hazard function of time to response data and handle the missing responses using the multiple imputation approach. We evaluate the operating characteristics of the proposed method through extensive simulation studies. We show that the proposed method reduces the total length of the trial duration and yields desirable operating characteristics for different physician-specified lower bounds of response rate with different true response rates.

Is paromomycin an effective and safe treatment against cutaneous leishmaniasis? A meta-analysis of 14 randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: High cost, poor compliance, and systemic toxicity have limited the use of pentavalent antimony compounds (SbV), the treatment of choice for cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL). Paromomycin (PR) has been developed as an alternative to SbV, but existing data are conflicting. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We searched PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, without language restriction, through August 2007, to identify randomized controlled trials that compared the efficacy or safety between PR and placebo or SbV. Primary outcome was clinical cure, defined as complete healing, disappearance, or reepithelialization of all lesions. Data were extracted independently by two investigators, and pooled using a random-effects model. Fourteen trials including 1,221 patients were included. In placebo-controlled trials, topical PR appeared to have therapeutic activity against the old world and new world CL, with increased local reactions, when used with methylbenzethonium chloride (MBCL) compared to when used alone (risk ratio [RR] for clinical cure, 2.58 versus 1.01: RR for local reactions, 1.60 versus 1.07). In SbV-controlled trials, the efficacy of topical PR was not significantly different from that of intralesional SbV in the old world CL (RR, 0.70; 95% confidence interval, 0.26-1.89), whereas topical PR was inferior to parenteral SbV in treating the new world CL (0.67; 0.54-0.82). No significant difference in efficacy was found between parenteral PR and parenteral SbV in the new world CL (0.88; 0.56-1.38). Systemic side effects were fewer with topical or parenteral PR than parenteral SbV. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Topical PR with MBCL could be a therapeutic alternative to SbV in selected cases of the old world CL. Development of new formulations with better efficacy and tolerability remains to be an area of future research.

Are there age-, strain-, and sex-differences in the prolonged exposure to methylphenidate?

Repeated treatment with psychostimulants produces behavioral sensitization that results in increased locomotor responses so that lower drug doses are required to obtain the same effect and cross-sensitization with other stimulants. Methylphenidate (MPD; Ritalin) is most frequently prescribed to treat children having attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), a syndrome with onset in childhood characterized by high levels of inattention, hyperactivity, and impulsivity. Little is known of the consequences involving the long-term use of MPD as treatment for ADHD. This study investigates if there are age, genetic/strain, and sex differences in the prolonged exposure to MPD and cross-sensitization with amphetamine. The objective is to determine whether (a) early exposure to MPD in adolescent rats increases their sensitivity to the drug when they are adult rats, (b) there are strain and sex differences in the response to MPD, and (c) treatment with MPD in adolescent and adult Wistar-Kyoto (WKY), spontaneously hyperactive/hypertensive rat (SHR), and Sprague-Dawley (SD) rat results in cross-sensitization with amphetamine. The hypotheses are that (1) early exposure to MPD in adolescent rats increases their sensitivity to the drug when they reach adulthood, and that this hypersensitivity is dose-, strain-, and sex-dependent and (2) adult rats treated with MPD as adolescents will show a greater cross-sensitization to amphetamine than those adult rats treated with saline as adolescents, and that this cross-sensitization is dose-, strain-, and sex-dependent. The study consists of recording and evaluating locomotor activity of female and male WKY, SHR, and SD rats before and after acute and repeated MPD administration when these rats are young and as adults follows by an amphetamine treatment. Results showed that repeated treatment with MPD elicited behavioral sensitization and cross-sensitization with amphetamine in these animals. The study also found that strain and sex play a crucial role in the differentiated sensitivity to the acute and chronic effects of MPD. The development of behavioral sensitization and cross-sensitization are also dependent on the dose of MPD and the age of the rat. ^

Factors contributing to the attrition of women in the African-American Nutrition for Life study

Background. There is currently a push to increase the number of minorities in cancer clinical trials in an effort to reduce cancer health disparities. Overcoming barriers to clinical trial research for minorities is necessary if we are to achieve the goals of Healthy People 2010. To understand the unexpectedly high rate of attrition in the A NULIFE study, the research team examined the perceived barriers to participation among minority women. The purpose of this study was to determine if either personal or study-related factors influenced healthy pre-menopausal women aged 25-45 years to terminate their participation in the A NULIFE Study. We hypothesized that personal factors were the driving forces for attrition rates in the prevention trial.^ Methods. The target population consisted of eligible women who consented to the A NULIFE study but withdrew prior to being randomized (N= 46), as well as eligible women who completed the informed consent process for the A NULIFE study and withdrew after randomization (N= 42). Examination of attrition rates in this study occurred at a time point when 10 out of 12 participant groups had completed the A NULIFE study. Data involving the 2 groups that were actively engaged in study activities were not used in this analysis. A survey instrument was designed to query the personal and study-related factors that were believed to have contributed to the decision to terminate participation in the A NULIFE study.^ Results. Overall, the highest ranked personal reason that influenced withdrawal from the study was being “too busy” with other obligations. The second highest ranked factor for withdrawal was work obligations. Whereas, more than half of all participants agreed that they were well-informed about the study and considered the study personnel to be approachable, 54% of participants would have been inclined to remain in the study if it were located at a local community center.^ Conclusions. Time commitment was likely a major factor for withdrawal from the A NULIFE study. Future investigators should implement trials within participant communities where possible. Also, focus group settings may provide detailed insight into factors that contribute to the attrition of minorities in cancer clinical trials.^