Creative and Innovative Statistics in Clinical Research and Development

Summary

Objectives: The aim of this paper is to show that even in a highly regulated area such as clinical research and development in pharmaceutical industry, there are needs and ample opportunities for statisticians and other medical informatics professionals to further creatively develop and implement methods in order to support the collection, analysis and interpretation of clinical data.

Methods: The recently published “Critical Path” initiative of the US Food and Drug Administration discusses the decline in new drug submissions in the last decade and illustrates potential causes in the present clinical development process. Areas where statisticians can and have begun to look for new innovative ways to overcome these shortcomings are presented and examples of such novel approaches that have been developed by statistical methodologists in the pharmaceutical industry together with statisticians in academia are given.

Results: In Early Development, i.e., in the first studies in man with a new compound, a combination of Bayesian methods and modeling approaches is particularly promising to increase the efficiency of decision making whereas in later phases (IIb and III) a marriage of modeling and classical frequentist approaches together with novel adaptive designs is expected to help to chose the right dose regimen and to perform the trials more efficiently in reduced time.

Conclusions: The combination of known statistical methods and thinking and the development of new approaches are in line with the present paradigm of “learning and confirming” in regulated clinical development while increasing the efficiency of both.

Keywords

Drug evaluation - drug approval - clinical trials - biometry - statistical models

• References

• 1 Grieve AP. Do Statisticians Count? A Personal View. Pharmaceutical Statistics 2002; 1: 35-43.
• 2 Morgan D. et al Qualified Statisticians in the European Pharmaceutical Industry: Report of a European Federation of Statisticians in the Pharmaceutical Industry (EFSPI) Working Group. DIAJ 1999; 33: 407-15.
• 3 Innovation/Stagnation: Challenge and Opportunity on the Critical Path to New Medical Products. FDA report, March 2004 http://www.fda.gov/oc/initiatives/criticalpath/whitepaper.html
• 4 O’Neill RT. A Perspective on Contributions of Biostatistics to the Critical Path Initiative. Presentation given at Workshop on “Model-based drug development – A cornerstone of the FDA’s Critical Path Initiative”, Basel Biometric Society, Dec 2004
• 5 Senn S. Statistical Issues in Drug Development. Chichester: Wiley; 1997
• 6 Bretz F, Pinheiro J, Branson M. On a Hybrid Method in Dose Finding Studies. Methods Inf Med 2004; 43: 457-60.
• 7 Bretz F, Pinheiro J, Branson M. Combining Multiple Comparisons and Modeling Techniques in Dose-Response Studies. Biometrics (to appear).
• 8 Gugerli U, Maurer W, Mellein B. Internally Adaptive Designs for Parallel Group Trials. Drug Information Journal 1993; 27: 721-32.
• 9 Bauer P, Köhne K. Evaluation of experiments with adaptive interim analysis. Biometrics 1994; 50: 1029-41.
• 10 Lehmacher W, Wassmer G. Adaptive sample size calculations in group sequential trials. Biometrics 1999; 55: 1286-90.
• 11 Hommel G. Adaptive Modifications of Hypotheses After an Interim Analysis. Biometrical Journal 2001; 5: 581-9.
• 12 McEntegart DJ. The pursuit of balance using stratified and dynamic randomization techniques: An overview. Drug Information Journal 2003; 37: 293-308.
• 13 Friedman LM, Fuberg CD, DeMets DL. Fundamentals of Clinical Trials. 3rd ed. New York: Springer; 1998
• 14 Pinheiro J. Statistical considerations for selecting randomization schemes. Novartis internal technical report 2005
• 15 Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act – As Amended by the FDA Modernization Act of 1997 http://www.fda.gov/opacom/laws/default.htm
• 16 FDA Guidance for Industry: Providing Clinical Evidence of Effectiveness for Human Drugs and Biological Products
• 17 CPMP PtC on Application with 1. Meta Analysis 2. One Pivotal Study http://www.emea.eu.int/index/indexh1.htm
• 18 Maca J, Gallo P, Branson M, Maurer W. Reconsidering some aspects of the two-trial paradigm. Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics 2002; 12: 107-9.
• 19 Little RJA, Rubin DB. Statistical Analysis with Missing Data. New York: Wiley; 2002
• 20 Schafer JL. Analysis of Incomplete Multivariate Data. London: CRC Press / Chapman & Hall; 1997
• 21 Rubin DB. Inference and missing data. Biometrika 1976; 63: 581-92.
• 22 Schafer JL. Multiple imputation: a primer. Statistical Methods in Medical Research 1999; 8: 3-15.
• 23 Carpenter J, Pocock S, Lamm CJ. Coping with missing data in clinical trials: a model-based approach applied to asthma trials. Statistics in Medicine 2002; 21: 1043-66.
• 24 Neuenschwander B, Branson M. Modeling missingness for time-to-event data: a case study in osteoporosis. Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics 2004; 14 (04) 1005-9.
• 25 Wood AM, White IR, Thompson SG. Are missing outcome data adequately handled? A review of published randomized controlled trials in major medical journals. Clinical Trials 2004; 1: 368-76.