The United Kingdom Glaucoma Treatment Study:a multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial: design and methodology

Elevated intraocular pressure (IOP) is a major risk factor for the deterioration of open-angle glaucoma (OAG); medical IOP reduction is the standard treatment, yet no randomized placebo-controlled study of medical IOP reduction has been undertaken previously. The United Kingdom Glaucoma Treatment Study (UKGTS) tests the hypothesis that treatment with a topical prostaglandin analog, compared with placebo, reduces the frequency of visual field (VF) deterioration events in OAG patients by 50% over a 2-year period.

Clinical trial design in non-invasive brain stimulation psychiatric research

Major depressive disorder (MDD) trials - investigating either non-pharmacological or pharmacological interventions - have shown mixed results. Many reasons explain this heterogeneity, but one that stands out is the trial design due to specific challenges in the field. We aimed therefore to review the methodology of non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) trials and provide a framework to improve clinical trial design. We performed a systematic review for randomized, controlled MDD trials whose intervention was transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) or transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) in MEDLINE and other databases from April 2002 to April 2008. We created an unstructured checklist based on CONSORT guidelines to extract items such as power analysis, sham method, blinding assessment, allocation concealment, operational criteria used for MDD, definition of refractory depression and primary study hypotheses. Thirty-one studies were included. We found that the main methodological issues can be divided in to three groups: (1) issues related to phase II/small trials, (2) issues related to MDD trials and, (3) specific issues of NIBS studies. Taken together, they can threaten study validity and lead to inconclusive results. Feasible solutions include: estimating the sample size a priori; measuring the degree of refractoriness of the subjects; specifying the primary hypothesis and statistical tests; controlling predictor variables through stratification randomization methods or using strict eligibility criteria; adjusting the study design to the target population; using adaptive designs and exploring NIBS efficacy employing biological markers. In conclusion, our study summarizes the main methodological issues of NIBS trials and proposes a number of alternatives to manage them. Copyright (C) 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Clinical trial design for orthodontists

High-quality research should form the basis of all clinical practice. Randomized controlled trials currently provide the gold standard for investigating the effectiveness of treatment interventions and these are increasingly being used in orthodontics. Here we discuss the reasons why this form of investigation provides the most useful evidence for assessing treatment outcome. The methods available to achieve true randomization, a fundamental component in the design of these trials, are also discussed. In addition, we focus on how to minimize bias in clinical research, not only during the design and management of a trial, but also when disseminating results. We focus on the importance of using control groups correctly and describe methods that are available to adequately power a trial. Finally, we emphasise the importance of accurate and transparent reporting, which facilitates correct communication and assessment of the evidence.

Adaptive clinical trial design for targeted therapy development

The development of targeted therapy involve many challenges. Our study will address some of the key issues involved in biomarker identification and clinical trial design. In our study, we propose two biomarker selection methods, and then apply them in two different clinical trial designs for targeted therapy development. In particular, we propose a Bayesian two-step lasso procedure for biomarker selection in the proportional hazards model in Chapter 2. In the first step of this strategy, we use the Bayesian group lasso to identify the important marker groups, wherein each group contains the main effect of a single marker and its interactions with treatments. In the second step, we zoom in to select each individual marker and the interactions between markers and treatments in order to identify prognostic or predictive markers using the Bayesian adaptive lasso. In Chapter 3, we propose a Bayesian two-stage adaptive design for targeted therapy development while implementing the variable selection method given in Chapter 2. In Chapter 4, we proposed an alternate frequentist adaptive randomization strategy for situations where a large number of biomarkers need to be incorporated in the study design. We also propose a new adaptive randomization rule, which takes into account the variations associated with the point estimates of survival times. In all of our designs, we seek to identify the key markers that are either prognostic or predictive with respect to treatment. We are going to use extensive simulation to evaluate the operating characteristics of our methods.^

Wetland trail design and construction /

"0123-2833-MTDC"--Cover.

Optimizing The Nasal Allergen Challenge Model For The Study Of Allergic Rhinitis

Background The Allergic Rhinitis Clinical Investigator Collaborative (AR-CIC) uses a Nasal Allergen Challenge (NAC) model to study the pathophysiology of AR and provides proof of concept for novel therapeutics. The NAC model needs to ensure optimal participant qualification, allergen challenge, clinical symptoms capture and biological samples collection. Repeatability of the protocol is key to ensuring unbiased efficacy analysis of novel therapeutics. The effect of allergen challenge on IL-33 gene expression and its relation to IL1RL1 receptor and cytokine secretion was investigated. Methods Several iterations of the NAC protocol was tested, comparing variations of qualifying criteria based on the Total Nasal Symptom Score (TNSS) and Peak Nasal Inspiratory Flow (PNIF). The lowest allergen concentration was delivered and TNSS and PNIF recorded 15 minutes later. Participants qualified if the particular criteria for the protocol were met, otherwise the next higher allergen concentration (4-fold increase), was administered until the targets were reached. Participants returned for a NAC visit and received varying allergen challenge concentrations depending on the protocol, TNSS/PNIF were recorded at 15 minutes, 30 minutes, 1 hour, and hourly up to 12 hours, a 24 hour time point was added in later iterations. Repeatability was evaluated using a 3-4week interval between screening, NAC1, and NAC2 visits. Various biomarker samples were collected. Results A combined TNSS and PNIF criterion was more successful in qualifying participants. The cumulative allergen challenge (CAC) protocol proved more reliable in producing a robust clinical and biomarker response. Repeatability of the CAC protocol was achieved with a 3-week interval between visits, on a clinical and biological basis. IL-33 cytokine is an important biomarker in initiating the inflammatory response in AR in humans. IL-33 and IL1RL1 expression might employ a negative feedback mechanism in human nasal epithelial cells. Comparing the clinical and biological response to ragweed vs cat allergen challenge, proved the CAC protocol’s suitability for use employing different allergens. Conclusion The AR-CIC’s CAC protocol is an effective method of studying AR, capable of generating measurable and repeatable clinical and biomarker responses, enabling better understanding of AR pathophysiology and ensuring that any change would be purely due to medication under investigation in a clinical trial setting.

A simulation study of the standard design, the rolling six design, the CRM, and the modified CRM in Phase I clinical trials

The Phase I clinical trial is considered the "first in human" study in medical research to examine the toxicity of a new agent. It determines the maximum tolerable dose (MTD) of a new agent, i.e., the highest dose in which toxicity is still acceptable. Several phase I clinical trial designs have been proposed in the past 30 years. The well known standard method, so called the 3+3 design, is widely accepted by clinicians since it is the easiest to implement and it does not need a statistical calculation. Continual reassessment method (CRM), a design uses Bayesian method, has been rising in popularity in the last two decades. Several variants of the CRM design have also been suggested in numerous statistical literatures. Rolling six is a new method introduced in pediatric oncology in 2008, which claims to shorten the trial duration as compared to the 3+3 design. The goal of the present research was to simulate clinical trials and compare these phase I clinical trial designs. Patient population was created by discrete event simulation (DES) method. The characteristics of the patients were generated by several distributions with the parameters derived from a historical phase I clinical trial data review. Patients were then selected and enrolled in clinical trials, each of which uses the 3+3 design, the rolling six, or the CRM design. Five scenarios of dose-toxicity relationship were used to compare the performance of the phase I clinical trial designs. One thousand trials were simulated per phase I clinical trial design per dose-toxicity scenario. The results showed the rolling six design was not superior to the 3+3 design in terms of trial duration. The time to trial completion was comparable between the rolling six and the 3+3 design. However, they both shorten the duration as compared to the two CRM designs. Both CRMs were superior to the 3+3 design and the rolling six in accuracy of MTD estimation. The 3+3 design and rolling six tended to assign more patients to undesired lower dose levels. The toxicities were slightly greater in the CRMs.^

Clinical trial designs of new medicinal products for treating schizophrenia: discussion of EMA's Guideline and a Better Long Term Trial Design

Background and Objectives: Schizophrenia is a severe chronic disease. Endpoint variables lack objectivity and the diagnostic criteria have evolved with time. In order to guide the development of new drugs, European Medicines Agency (EMA) issued a guideline on the clinical investigation of medicinal products for the treatment of schizophrenia. Methods: Authors reviewed and discussed the efficacy trial part of the Guideline. Results: The Guideline divides clinical efficacy trials into short-term trials and long-term trials. The short-term three-arm trial is recommended to replace the short-term two-arm active-controlled non-inferiority trial because the latter has sensitivity issues. The Guideline ultimately makes that three-arm trial a superiority trial. The Guideline discusses four types of long-term trial designs. The randomized withdrawal trial design has some disadvantages. Long-term two-arm active-controlled non-inferiority trial is not recommended due to the sensitivity issue. Extension of the short-term trial is only suitable for extension of the short-term two-arm active-controlled superiority trial. The Guideline suggests that a hybrid design of a randomized withdrawal trial incorporated into a long-term parallel trial might be optimal. However, such a design has some disadvantages and might be too complex to be carried out. Authors suggest instead a three-group long-term trial design, which could provide comparison between test drug and active comparator along with comparison between the test drug and placebo. This alternative could arguably be much easier to carry out compared with the hybrid design. Conclusions: The three-group long-term design merits further discussion and evaluation.

Economic return of clinical trials performed under the pediatric exclusivity program.

CONTEXT: In 1997, Congress authorized the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to grant 6-month extensions of marketing rights through the Pediatric Exclusivity Program if industry sponsors complete FDA-requested pediatric trials. The program has been praised for creating incentives for studies in children and has been criticized as a "windfall" to the innovator drug industry. This critique has been a substantial part of congressional debate on the program, which is due to expire in 2007. OBJECTIVE: To quantify the economic return to industry for completing pediatric exclusivity trials. DESIGN AND SETTING: A cohort study of programs conducted for pediatric exclusivity. Nine drugs that were granted pediatric exclusivity were selected. From the final study reports submitted to the FDA (2002-2004), key elements of the clinical trial design and study operations were obtained, and the cost of performing each study was estimated and converted into estimates of after-tax cash outflows. Three-year market sales were obtained and converted into estimates of after-tax cash inflows based on 6 months of additional market protection. Net economic return (cash inflows minus outflows) and net return-to-costs ratio (net economic return divided by cash outflows) for each product were then calculated. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Net economic return and net return-to-cost ratio. RESULTS: The indications studied reflect a broad representation of the program: asthma, tumors, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, hypertension, depression/generalized anxiety disorder, diabetes mellitus, gastroesophageal reflux, bacterial infection, and bone mineralization. The distribution of net economic return for 6 months of exclusivity varied substantially among products (net economic return ranged from -$8.9 million to $507.9 million and net return-to-cost ratio ranged from -0.68 to 73.63). CONCLUSIONS: The economic return for pediatric exclusivity is variable. As an incentive to complete much-needed clinical trials in children, pediatric exclusivity can generate lucrative returns or produce more modest returns on investment.

Personalised and Precision Medicine in Cancer Clinical Trials: Panacea for Progress or Pandora's Box?

Cancer clinical trials have been one of the key foundations for significant advances in oncology. However, there is a clear recognition within the academic, care delivery and pharmaceutical/biotech communities that our current model of clinical trial discovery and development is no longer fit for purpose. Delivering transformative cancer care should increasingly be our mantra, rather than maintaining the status quo of, at best, the often miniscule incremental benefits that are observed with many current clinical trials. As we enter the era of precision medicine for personalised cancer care (precision and personalised medicine), it is important that we capture and utilise our greater understanding of the biology of disease to drive innovative approaches in clinical trial design and implementation that can lead to a step change in cancer care delivery. A number of advances have been practice changing (e.g. imatinib mesylate in chronic myeloid leukaemia, Herceptin in erb-B2-positive breast cancer), and increasingly we are seeing the promise of a number of newer approaches, particularly in diseases like lung cancer and melanoma. Targeting immune checkpoints has recently yielded some highly promising results. New algorithms that maximise the effectiveness of clinical trials, through for example a multi-stage, multi-arm type design are increasingly gaining traction. However, our enthusiasm for the undoubted advances that have been achieved are being tempered by a realisation that these new approaches may have significant cost implications. This article will address these competing issues, mainly from a European perspective, highlight the problems and challenges to healthcare systems and suggest potential solutions that will ensure that the cost/value rubicon is addressed in a way that allows stakeholders to work together to deliver optimal cost-effective cancer care, the benefits of which can be transferred directly to our patients.

A preliminary evaluation of cognitive-behaviour therapy for clinical perfectionism: a case series

Objective: The construct of 'clinical perfectionism' has been developed in response to criticisms that other approaches have failed to yield advances in the treatment of the type of self-oriented perfectionism that poses a clinical problem. The primary aim of this study was to conduct a preliminary investigation into the efficacy of a theory-driven, cognitive-behavioural intervention for 'clinical perfectionism'. Design. A multiple baseline single case series design was used. Method: A specific, 10-session cognitive-behavioural intervention to address clinical perfectionism in eating disorders was adapted to allow its use in nine patients referred with a range of axis I disorders and clinical perfectionism. Results: The intervention led to clinically significant improvements in self-referential perfectionism from pretreatment to follow-up for six of the nine participants on two perfectionism measures and for three of the nine participants on the measure of clinical perfectionism. Statistically significant improvements from pre- to post-intervention for the group as a whole were found on all three measures. The improvements were maintained at follow-up. Conclusions: The finding that clinical perfectionism is improved in the majority of participants is particularly encouraging given that perfectionism has traditionally been viewed as a personality characteristic resistant to change. These preliminary findings warrant replication in a larger study.