An introduction to adaptive designs and adaptation in CNS trials

Fighting for recovery on multiple fronts: The past, present, and future of clinical trials for spinal cord injury

Through many decades of preclinical research, great progress has been achieved in understanding the complex nature of spinal cord injury (SCI). Preclinical research efforts have guided and shaped clinical trials, which are growing in number by the year. Currently, 1,149 clinical trials focused on improving outcomes after SCI are registered in the U.S. National Library of Medicine at ClinicalTrials.gov. We conducted a systematic analysis of these SCI clinical trials, using publicly accessible data downloaded from ClinicalTrials.gov. After extracting all available data for these trials, we categorized each trial according to the types of interventions being tested and the types of outcomes assessed. We then evaluated clinical trial characteristics, both globally and by year, in order to understand the areas of growth and change over time. With regard to clinical trial attributes, we found that most trials have low enrollment, only test single interventions, and have limited numbers of primary outcomes. Some gaps in reporting are apparent; for instance, over 75% of clinical trials with "Completed" status do not have results posted, and the Phase of some trials is incorrectly classified as "Not applicable" despite testing a drug or biological compound. When analyzing trials based on types of interventions assessed, we identified the largest representation in trials testing rehab/training/exercise, neuromodulation, and behavioral modifications. Most highly represented primary outcomes include motor function of the upper and lower extremities, safety, and pain. The most highly represented secondary outcomes include quality of life and pain. Over the past 15 years, we identified increased representation of neuromodulation and rehabilitation trials, and decreased representation of drug trials. Overall, the number of new clinical trials initiated each year continues to grow, signifying a hopeful future for the clinical treatment of SCI. Together, our work provides a comprehensive glimpse into the past, present, and future of SCI clinical trials, and suggests areas for improvement in clinical trial reporting.

Great Expectations: recommendations for improving the methodological rigor of psychedelic clinical trials

RATIONALE

Psychedelic research continues to garner significant public and scientific interest with a growing number of clinical studies examining a wide range of conditions and disorders. However, expectancy effects and effective condition masking have been raised as critical limitations to the interpretability of the research.

OBJECTIVE

In this article, we review the many methodological challenges of conducting psychedelic clinical trials and provide recommendations for improving the rigor of future research.

RESULTS

Although some challenges are shared with psychotherapy and pharmacology trials more broadly, psychedelic clinical trials have to contend with several unique sources of potential bias. The subjective effects of a high-dose psychedelic are often so pronounced that it is difficult to mask participants to their treatment condition; the significant hype from positive media coverage on the clinical potential of psychedelics influences participants' expectations for treatment benefit; and participant unmasking and treatment expectations can interact in such a way that makes psychedelic therapy highly susceptible to large placebo and nocebo effects. Specific recommendations to increase the success of masking procedures and reduce the influence of participant expectancies are discussed in the context of study development, participant recruitment and selection, incomplete disclosure of the study design, choice of active placebo condition, as well as the measurement of participant expectations and masking efficacy.

CONCLUSION

Incorporating the recommended design elements is intended to reduce the risk of bias in psychedelic clinical trials and thereby increases the ability to discern treatment-specific effects of psychedelic therapy.

Biomarker-Guided Adaptive Trial Designs in Phase II and Phase III: A Methodological Review

BACKGROUND

Personalized medicine is a growing area of research which aims to tailor the treatment given to a patient according to one or more personal characteristics. These characteristics can be demographic such as age or gender, or biological such as a genetic or other biomarker. Prior to utilizing a patient's biomarker information in clinical practice, robust testing in terms of analytical validity, clinical validity and clinical utility is necessary. A number of clinical trial designs have been proposed for testing a biomarker's clinical utility, including Phase II and Phase III clinical trials which aim to test the effectiveness of a biomarker-guided approach to treatment; these designs can be broadly classified into adaptive and non-adaptive. While adaptive designs allow planned modifications based on accumulating information during a trial, non-adaptive designs are typically simpler but less flexible.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

We have undertaken a comprehensive review of biomarker-guided adaptive trial designs proposed in the past decade. We have identified eight distinct biomarker-guided adaptive designs and nine variations from 107 studies. Substantial variability has been observed in terms of how trial designs are described and particularly in the terminology used by different authors. We have graphically displayed the current biomarker-guided adaptive trial designs and summarised the characteristics of each design.

CONCLUSIONS

Our in-depth overview provides future researchers with clarity in definition, methodology and terminology for biomarker-guided adaptive trial designs.

Advances in clinical trials for movement disorders

In the past several years, there have been several innovations in the design of clinical trials assessing new therapies for patients with movement disorders. These include attempts to address difficulties in conducting clinical trials in treated patients in the advanced stages of their illness, demonstrating disease-modifying effects or a reduction in the development of cumulative disability, and assessing the effects of interventions in patients in the premanifest state of their disease. In addition, there have been advances in clinical trial methodologies and changes in regulatory guidelines that permit the performance of more efficient studies, with a reduction in the cost and duration of the development period. These will be reviewed in the present article. © 2015 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.

A comparison of methods for treatment selection in seamless phase II/III clinical trials incorporating information on short-term endpoints

In an adaptive seamless phase II/III clinical trial interim analysis, data are used for treatment selection, enabling resources to be focused on comparison of more effective treatment(s) with a control. In this paper, we compare two methods recently proposed to enable use of short-term endpoint data for decision-making at the interim analysis. The comparison focuses on the power and the probability of correctly identifying the most promising treatment. We show that the choice of method depends on how well short-term data predict the best treatment, which may be measured by the correlation between treatment effects on short- and long-term endpoints.

Learning from the past and looking to the future: Emerging perspectives for improving the treatment of psychiatric disorders

Modern neuropsychopharmacology commenced in the 1950s with the serendipitous discovery of first-generation antipsychotics and antidepressants which were therapeutically effective yet had marked adverse effects. Today, a broader palette of safer and better-tolerated agents is available for helping people that suffer from schizophrenia, depression and other psychiatric disorders, while complementary approaches like psychotherapy also have important roles to play in their treatment, both alone and in association with medication. Nonetheless, despite considerable efforts, current management is still only partially effective, and highly-prevalent psychiatric disorders of the brain continue to represent a huge personal and socio-economic burden. The lack of success in discovering more effective pharmacotherapy has contributed, together with many other factors, to a relative disengagement by pharmaceutical firms from neuropsychiatry. Nonetheless, interest remains high, and partnerships are proliferating with academic centres which are increasingly integrating drug discovery and translational research into their traditional activities. This is, then, a time of transition and an opportune moment to thoroughly survey the field. Accordingly, the present paper, first, chronicles the discovery and development of psychotropic agents, focusing in particular on their mechanisms of action and therapeutic utility, and how problems faced were eventually overcome. Second, it discusses the lessons learned from past successes and failures, and how they are being applied to promote future progress. Third, it comprehensively surveys emerging strategies that are (1), improving our understanding of the diagnosis and classification of psychiatric disorders; (2), deepening knowledge of their underlying risk factors and pathophysiological substrates; (3), refining cellular and animal models for discovery and validation of novel therapeutic agents; (4), improving the design and outcome of clinical trials; (5), moving towards reliable biomarkers of patient subpopulations and medication efficacy and (6), promoting collaborative approaches to innovation by uniting key partners from the regulators, industry and academia to patients. Notwithstanding the challenges ahead, the many changes and ideas articulated herein provide new hope and something of a framework for progress towards the improved prevention and relief of psychiatric and other CNS disorders, an urgent mission for our Century.

On improving human clinical trials to the level of animal ischemic stroke studies

This is a response to Jickling and Sharp's paper discussing the near-complete failure of clinical trials for stroke interventions. While they propose a paradigm shift in the way preclinical research is conducted, I propose that it is clinical trial design that needs an overhaul. Clinical trials could be designed to reduce variance, prevent data entry errors, and encompass less ambitious enrollment criteria limited to fewer centers which have demonstrated expertise in the treatment of stroke (and TBI). Statistical fundamentalism is another soluble problem: clinical trial designs tend to address what is medically significant as opposed to what is primarily statistically significant. Adaptive Design is an alternative to current protocols that needs urgent consideration if we are to get through the Valley of Death between bench and bedside. Maybe it is time to change the clinical trial paradigm to adopt the precise modeling used in good laboratory research rather than asking scientists to give up well-established procedures for producing reliable and reproducible results.

The ongoing pursuit of neuroprotective therapies in Parkinson disease

Many agents developed for neuroprotective treatment of Parkinson disease (PD) have shown great promise in the laboratory, but none have translated to positive results in patients with PD. Potential neuroprotective drugs, such as ubiquinone, creatine and PYM50028, have failed to show any clinical benefits in recent high-profile clinical trials. This 'failure to translate' is likely to be related primarily to our incomplete understanding of the pathogenic mechanisms underlying PD, and excessive reliance on data from toxin-based animal models to judge which agents should be selected for clinical trials. Restricted resources inevitably mean that difficult compromises must be made in terms of trial design, and reliable estimation of efficacy is further hampered by the absence of validated biomarkers of disease progression. Drug development in PD dementia has been mostly unsuccessful; however, emerging biochemical, genetic and pathological evidence suggests a link between tau and amyloid-β deposition and cognitive decline in PD, potentially opening up new possibilities for therapeutic intervention. This Review discusses the most important 'druggable' disease mechanisms in PD, as well as the most-promising drugs that are being evaluated for their potential efficiency in treatment of motor and cognitive impairments in PD.

Generating health technology assessment evidence for rare diseases

OBJECTIVES

Rare diseases are often heterogeneous in their progression and response to treatment, with only a small population for study. This provides challenges for evidence generation to support HTA, so novel research methods are required.

METHODS

Discussion with an expert panel was augmented with references and case studies to explore robust approaches for HTA evidence generation for rare disease treatments.

RESULTS

Traditional RCTs can be modified using sequential, three-stage or adaptive designs to gain more power from a small patient population or to focus trial design. However, such designs need to maintain important design aspects such as randomization and blinding and be analyzed to take account of the multiple analyses performed. N-of-1 trials use within-patient randomization to test repeat periods of treatment and control until a response is clear. Such trials could be particularly valuable for rare diseases and when prospectively planned across several patients and analyzed using Bayesian techniques, a population effect can be estimated that might be of value to HTA. When the optimal outcome is unclear in a rare disease, disease specific patient reported outcomes can elucidate impacts on patients' functioning and wellbeing. Likewise, qualitative research can be used to elicit patients' perspectives, with just a small number of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

International consensus is needed on ways to improve evidence collection and assessment of technologies for rare diseases, which recognize the value of novel study designs and analyses in a setting where the outcomes and effects of importance are yet to be agreed.

Slowing of neurodegeneration in Parkinson's disease and Huntington's disease: future therapeutic perspectives

Several important advances have been made in our understanding of the pathways that lead to cell dysfunction and death in Parkinson's disease and Huntington's disease. These advances have been informed by both direct analysis of the post-mortem brain and by study of the biological consequences of the genetic causes of these diseases. Some of the pathways that have been implicated so far include mitochondrial dysfunction, oxidative stress, kinase pathways, calcium dysregulation, inflammation, protein handling, and prion-like processes. Intriguingly, these pathways seem to be important in the pathogenesis of both diseases and have led to the identification of molecular targets for candidate interventions designed to slow or reverse their course. We review some recent advances that underlie putative therapies for neuroprotection in Parkinson's disease and Huntington's disease, and potential targets that might be exploited in the future. Although we will need to overcome important hurdles, especially in terms of clinical trial design, we propose several target pathways that merit further study. In Parkinson's disease, these targets include agents that might improve mitochondrial function or increase degradation of defective mitochondria, kinase inhibitors, calcium channel blockers, and approaches that interfere with the misfolding, templating, and transmission of α-synuclein. In Huntington's disease, strategies might also be directed at mitochondrial bioenergetics and turnover, the prevention of protein dysregulation, disruption of the interaction between huntingtin and p53 or huntingtin-interacting protein 1 to reduce apoptosis, and interference with expression of mutant huntingtin at both the nucleic acid and protein levels.

Pathogenesis-targeted, disease-modifying therapies in Parkinson disease

Parkinson disease is an inexorably progressive neurodegenerative disorder. Multiple attempts have been made to establish therapies for Parkinson disease which provide neuroprotection or disease modification-two related, but not identical, concepts. However, to date, none of these attempts have succeeded. Many challenges exist in this field of research, including a complex multisystem disorder that includes dopaminergic and non-dopaminergic features; poorly understood and clearly multifaceted disease pathogenic mechanisms; a lack of reliable animal models; an absence of effective biomarkers of disease state, progression, and target engagement; and the confounding effects of potent symptomatic therapy. In this article, we will review previous, ongoing, and potential future trials designed to alter the progressive course of the disease from the perspective of the targeted underlying pathogenic mechanisms.

Obstacles to the development of a neuroprotective therapy for Parkinson's disease

A neuroprotective or disease-modifying therapy that can slow or stop disease progression and prevent the development of intolerable disability is the major unmet medical need in the treatment of Parkinson's disease (PD). Many putative neuroprotective agents have been identified in the laboratory, but none has been unequivocally demonstrated to provide disease-modifying effects in PD patients, even when clinical trials are positive. Obstacles to defining a neuroprotective therapy in PD include: (1) uncertainty about the cause of PD and precisely what to target, (2) a reliable animal model in which to test putative neuroprotective agents that accurately predicts results in PD patients, (3) insight about which dose to employ in clinical trials and which patient group to study, (4) a clinical trial design that reliably differentiates disease-modifying and symptomatic effects and that is acceptable to regulatory authorities, and (5) the cost and time of the development program. Advances have been made in each of these areas, thereby increasing the prospects of developing a neuroprotective or disease-modifying therapy in the not-too-distant future. These issues are reviewed in the present article.