Adaptive designs for clinical trials assessing biomarker-guided treatment strategies

Simulation study for evaluating an adaptive-randomisation Bayesian hybrid trial design with enrichment

Background

As we enter the era of precision medicine, the role of adaptive designs, such as response-adaptive randomisation or enrichment designs in drug discovery and development, has become increasingly important to identify the treatment given to a patient based on one or more biomarkers. Tailoring the ventilation supply technique according to the responsiveness of patients to positive end-expiratory pressure is a suitable setting for such a design.

Methods

In the setting of marker-strategy design, we propose a Bayesian response-adaptive randomisation with enrichment design based on group sequential analyses. This design combines the elements of enrichment design and response-adaptive randomisation. Concerning the enrichment strategy, Bayesian treatment-by-subset interaction measures were used to adaptively enrich the patients most likely to benefit from an experimental treatment while controlling the false-positive rate.The operating characteristics of the design were assessed by simulation and compared to those of alternate designs.

Results

The results obtained allowed the detection of the superiority of one treatment over another and the presence of a treatment-by-subgroup interaction while keeping the false-positive rate at approximately 5\% and reducing the average number of included patients. In addition, simulation studies identified that the number of interim analyses and the burn-in period may have an impact on the performance of the scheme.

Conclusion

The proposed design highlights important objectives of precision medicine, such as determining whether the experimental treatment is superior to another and identifying wheter such an efficacy could depend on patient profile.

A randomized controlled trial of desvenlafaxine-induced structural brain changes in the treatment of persistent depressive disorder

The anatomical changes that antidepressant medications induce in the brain and through which they exert their therapeutic effects remain largely unknown. We randomized 61 patients with Persistent Depressive Disorder (PDD) to receive either desvenlafaxine or placebo in a 12-week trial and acquired anatomical MRI scans in 42 of those patients at baseline before randomization and immediately at the end of the trial. We also acquired MRIs once in 39 age- and sex-matched healthy controls. We assessed whether the serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor, desvenlafaxine, differentially changed cortical thickness during the trial compared with placebo. Patients relative to controls at baseline had thinner cortices across the brain. Although baseline thickness was not associated with symptom severity, thicker baseline cortices predicted greater reduction in symptom severity in those treated with desvenlafaxine but not placebo. We did not detect significant treatment-by-time effects on cortical thickness. These findings suggest that baseline thickness may serve as predictive biomarkers for treatment response to desvenlafaxine. The absence of treatment-by-time effects may be attributable either to use of insufficient desvenlafaxine dosing, a lack of desvenlafaxine efficacy in treating PDD, or the short trial duration.

Deep Learning-Based Protein Features Predict Overall Survival and Chemotherapy Benefit in Gastric Cancer

Gastric cancer (GC) is one of the most common malignant tumors with a high mortality rate worldwide and lacks effective methods for prognosis prediction. Postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy is the first-line treatment for advanced gastric cancer, but only a subgroup of patients benefits from it. Here, we used 833 formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded resected tumor samples from patients with TNM stage II/III GC and established a proteomic subtyping workflow using 100 deep-learned features. Two proteomic subtypes (S-I and S-II) with overall survival differences were identified. S-I has a better survival rate and is sensitive to chemotherapy. Patients in the S-I who received adjuvant chemotherapy had a significant improvement in the 5-year overall survival rate compared with patients who received surgery alone (65.3% vs 52.6%; log-rank P = 0.014), but no improvement was observed in the S-II (54% vs 51%; log-rank P = 0.96). These results were verified in an independent validation set. Furthermore, we also evaluated the superiority and scalability of the deep learning-based workflow in cancer molecular subtyping, exhibiting its great utility and potential in prognosis prediction and therapeutic decision-making.

Adding flexibility to clinical trial designs: an example-based guide to the practical use of adaptive designs

Adaptive designs for clinical trials permit alterations to a study in response to accumulating data in order to make trials more flexible, ethical, and efficient. These benefits are achieved while preserving the integrity and validity of the trial, through the pre-specification and proper adjustment for the possible alterations during the course of the trial. Despite much research in the statistical literature highlighting the potential advantages of adaptive designs over traditional fixed designs, the uptake of such methods in clinical research has been slow. One major reason for this is that different adaptations to trial designs, as well as their advantages and limitations, remain unfamiliar to large parts of the clinical community. The aim of this paper is to clarify where adaptive designs can be used to address specific questions of scientific interest; we introduce the main features of adaptive designs and commonly used terminology, highlighting their utility and pitfalls, and illustrate their use through case studies of adaptive trials ranging from early-phase dose escalation to confirmatory phase III studies.

Point estimation following two-stage adaptive threshold enrichment clinical trials

Recently, several study designs incorporating treatment effect assessment in biomarker-based subpopulations have been proposed. Most statistical methodologies for such designs focus on the control of type I error rate and power. In this paper, we have developed point estimators for clinical trials that use the two-stage adaptive enrichment threshold design. The design consists of two stages, where in stage 1, patients are recruited in the full population. Stage 1 outcome data are then used to perform interim analysis to decide whether the trial continues to stage 2 with the full population or a subpopulation. The subpopulation is defined based on one of the candidate threshold values of a numerical predictive biomarker. To estimate treatment effect in the selected subpopulation, we have derived unbiased estimators, shrinkage estimators, and estimators that estimate bias and subtract it from the naive estimate. We have recommended one of the unbiased estimators. However, since none of the estimators dominated in all simulation scenarios based on both bias and mean squared error, an alternative strategy would be to use a hybrid estimator where the estimator used depends on the subpopulation selected. This would require a simulation study of plausible scenarios before the trial.

Imaging biomarker roadmap for cancer studies

Imaging biomarkers (IBs) are integral to the routine management of patients with cancer. IBs used daily in oncology include clinical TNM stage, objective response and left ventricular ejection fraction. Other CT, MRI, PET and ultrasonography biomarkers are used extensively in cancer research and drug development. New IBs need to be established either as useful tools for testing research hypotheses in clinical trials and research studies, or as clinical decision-making tools for use in healthcare, by crossing 'translational gaps' through validation and qualification. Important differences exist between IBs and biospecimen-derived biomarkers and, therefore, the development of IBs requires a tailored 'roadmap'. Recognizing this need, Cancer Research UK (CRUK) and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) assembled experts to review, debate and summarize the challenges of IB validation and qualification. This consensus group has produced 14 key recommendations for accelerating the clinical translation of IBs, which highlight the role of parallel (rather than sequential) tracks of technical (assay) validation, biological/clinical validation and assessment of cost-effectiveness; the need for IB standardization and accreditation systems; the need to continually revisit IB precision; an alternative framework for biological/clinical validation of IBs; and the essential requirements for multicentre studies to qualify IBs for clinical use.

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

Biomarker-guided treatment is a rapidly developing area of medicine, where treatment choice is personalised according to one or more of an individual’s biomarker measurements. A number of biomarker-guided trial designs have been proposed in the past decade, including both adaptive and non-adaptive trial designs which test the effectiveness of a biomarker-guided approach to treatment with the aim of improving patient health. A better understanding of them is needed as challenges occur both in terms of trial design and analysis. We have undertaken a comprehensive literature review based on an in-depth search strategy with a view to providing the research community with clarity in definition, methodology and terminology of the various biomarker-guided trial designs (both adaptive and non-adaptive designs) from a total of 211 included papers. In the present paper, we focus on non-adaptive biomarker-guided trial designs for which we have identified five distinct main types mentioned in 100 papers. We have graphically displayed each non-adaptive trial design and provided an in-depth overview of their key characteristics. Substantial variability has been observed in terms of how trial designs are described and particularly in the terminology used by different authors. Our comprehensive review provides guidance for those designing biomarker-guided trials.

European healthcare systems readiness to shift from ‘one-size fits all’ to personalized medicine

Personalized medicine (PM) is no longer an abstract healthcare approach. It has become a reality over the last years and is already successfully applied in the various medical fields. Although there are success stories of implementing PM, there are still many more opportunities to further implement and make full use of the potential of PM. We assessed the system readiness of healthcare systems in Europe to shift from the predominant ‘one size fits all’ healthcare approach to PM. We conclude that European healthcare systems are only partially ready for PM. Key challenges such as integration of big data, health literacy, reimbursement and regulatory issues need to be overcome in order to strengthen the implementation and uptake of PM.

Prevention Trials in Alzheimer's Disease: Current Status and Future Perspectives

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the most common form of dementia in the elderly. Over the past 20 years, both pharmacological and lifestyle interventions have been studied for AD prevention, but the overall results have been disappointing. The majority of disappointing results have raised questions and great challenges for the future of AD prevention trials. Ongoing advances in the knowledge of pathogenesis, in the identification of novel targets, in improved outcome measures, and in identification and validation of biomarkers may lead to effective strategies for AD prevention. In this paper, we review the selection of participants and interventions, trial design, outcome assessments, and promising biomarkers in prevention trials, and summarize the lessons learned from completed trials and perspectives from ongoing trials in AD prevention. Selection of optimal participants and interventions, coupled with more refined outcomes and more efficient trial design, may have the capacity to deliver a new era of preventive discovery in this challenging area.

Targeted proteomics identifies liquid-biopsy signatures for extracapsular prostate cancer

Biomarkers are rapidly gaining importance in personalized medicine. Although numerous molecular signatures have been developed over the past decade, there is a lack of overlap and many biomarkers fail to validate in independent patient cohorts and hence are not useful for clinical application. For these reasons, identification of novel and robust biomarkers remains a formidable challenge. We combine targeted proteomics with computational biology to discover robust proteomic signatures for prostate cancer. Quantitative proteomics conducted in expressed prostatic secretions from men with extraprostatic and organ-confined prostate cancers identified 133 differentially expressed proteins. Using synthetic peptides, we evaluate them by targeted proteomics in a 74-patient cohort of expressed prostatic secretions in urine. We quantify a panel of 34 candidates in an independent 207-patient cohort. We apply machine-learning approaches to develop clinical predictive models for prostate cancer diagnosis and prognosis. Our results demonstrate that computationally guided proteomics can discover highly accurate non-invasive biomarkers.

Proteomic technologies are capable of identifying thousands of proteins in biological samples, but biomarker applications are lagging. Here the authors use Multiple Reaction Monitoring Mass Spectrometry to delineate peptide signatures that accurately distinguish between defined prostate cancer patient risk groups.

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.

Clinical trial designs incorporating predictive biomarkers

Development of oncologic therapies has traditionally been performed in a sequence of clinical trials intended to assess safety (phase I), preliminary efficacy (phase II), and improvement over the standard of care (phase III) in homogeneous (in terms of tumor type and disease stage) patient populations. As cancer has become increasingly understood on the molecular level, newer "targeted" drugs that inhibit specific cancer cell growth and survival mechanisms have increased the need for new clinical trial designs, wherein pertinent questions on the relationship between patient biomarkers and response to treatment can be answered. Herein, we review the clinical trial design literature from initial to more recently proposed designs for targeted agents or those treatments hypothesized to have enhanced effectiveness within patient subgroups (e.g., those with a certain biomarker value or who harbor a certain genetic tumor mutation). We also describe a number of real clinical trials where biomarker-based designs have been utilized, including a discussion of their respective advantages and challenges. As cancers become further categorized and/or reclassified according to individual patient and tumor features, we anticipate a continued need for novel trial designs to keep pace with the changing frontier of clinical cancer research.

Clinical trials in progressive multiple sclerosis: lessons learned and future perspectives

Progressive multiple sclerosis is characterised clinically by the gradual accrual of disability independent of relapses and can occur with disease onset (primary progressive) or can be preceded by a relapsing disease course (secondary progressive). An effective disease-modifying treatment for progressive multiple sclerosis has not yet been identified, and so far the results of clinical trials have generally been disappointing. Ongoing advances in the knowledge of pathogenesis, in the identification of novel targets for neuroprotection, and in improved outcome measures could lead to effective treatments for progressive multiple sclerosis. In this Series paper, we summarise the lessons learned from completed clinical trials and perspectives from trials in progress in progressive multiple sclerosis. We review promising clinical, imaging, and biological markers, along with novel designs, for clinical trials. The use of more refined outcomes and truly neuroprotective drugs, coupled with more efficient trial design, has the capacity to deliver a new era of therapeutic discovery in this challenging area.

Working towards personalization in medicine: main obstacles to reaching this vision from today's perspective

Rapid advances in ‘omics’ sciences and technologies have elevated the relevance of personalized medicine. This article reviews the current advances in the application of personalized medicine, outlines and summarizes the key areas that still need to be addressed and gives recommendations in this direction. Eighteen relevant high-level reports on personalized medicine were reviewed in order to identify the gaps and needs that are present for the implementation of personalized medicine. We identify 12 key areas that represent the main obstacles on the road towards the personalization of medicine and divide these 12 key areas into four domains, namely: scientific research and stakeholder collaboration; translational tools; regulations and systematic early dialog with regulators; and uptake into healthcare systems. All of the evaluated reports agree on the imperative need for intensive collaboration among all stakeholders with early active participation and changes in the current healthcare infrastructure.