1
|
Brazauskas R, Eapen M, Wang T. Endpoint selection and evaluation in hematology studies. Best Pract Res Clin Haematol 2023; 36:101479. [PMID: 37611997 DOI: 10.1016/j.beha.2023.101479] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/15/2022] [Revised: 05/09/2023] [Accepted: 05/22/2023] [Indexed: 08/25/2023]
Abstract
Observational studies and clinical trials in hematology aim to examine treatments for blood disorders. The outcomes being studied must address the goals of the study and provide meaningful information about treatment course, disease progression, describe patients' survival experience and quality of life. Endpoints are the specific measures of these outcomes, and much consideration should be given to their selection. In this review, we describe the outcomes and endpoints frequently used in studying hematologic diseases and provide general guidelines for their statistical analysis. The main focus is on clinical outcomes which are commonly used in establishing treatment safety and efficacy. We also briefly discuss the role surrogate and composite endpoints play in hematology studies. The importance of patient reported outcomes to comprehensive assessment of the treatment effectiveness is highlighted. Provided practical considerations for choosing primary and secondary endpoints may be helpful in designing hematology clinical trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ruta Brazauskas
- Division of Biostatistics, Institute for Health and Equity, Medical College of Wisconsin, 8701 Watertown Plank Road, Milwaukee, WI, 53226, USA.
| | - Mary Eapen
- Division of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, Medical College of Wisconsin, 8701 Watertown Plank Road, Milwaukee, WI, 53226, USA.
| | - Tao Wang
- Division of Biostatistics, Institute for Health and Equity, Medical College of Wisconsin, 8701 Watertown Plank Road, Milwaukee, WI, 53226, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Kelkar NS, Morrison KS, Ackerman ME. Foundations for improved vaccine correlate of risk analysis using positive-unlabeled learning. Hum Vaccin Immunother 2023:2204020. [PMID: 37133899 DOI: 10.1080/21645515.2023.2204020] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/04/2023] Open
Abstract
Insights into mechanisms of protection afforded by vaccine efficacy field trials can be complicated by both low rates of exposure and protection. However, these barriers do not preclude the discovery of correlates of reduced risk (CoR) of infection, which are a critical first step in defining correlates of protection (CoP). Given the significant investment in large-scale human vaccine efficacy trials and immunogenicity data collected to support CoR discovery, novel approaches for analyzing efficacy trials to optimally support discovery of CoP are critically needed. By simulating immunological data and evaluating several machine learning approaches, this study lays the groundwork for deploying Positive/Unlabeled (P/U) learning methods, which are designed to differentiate between two groups in cases where only one group has a definitive label and the other remains ambiguous. This description applies to case-control analysis designs for field trials of vaccine efficacy: infected subjects, or cases, are by definition unprotected, whereas uninfected subjects, or controls, may have been either protected or unprotected but simply never exposed. Here, we investigate the value of applying P/U learning to classify study subjects using model immunogenicity data based on predicted protection status in order to support new insights into mechanisms of vaccine-mediated protection from infection. We demonstrate that P/U learning methods can reliably infer protection status, supporting the discovery of simulated CoP that are not observed in conventional comparisons of infection status cases and controls, and we propose next steps necessary for the practical deployment of this novel approach to correlate discovery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Natasha S Kelkar
- Department of Microbiology and Immunology, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH, USA
| | - Kyle S Morrison
- Department of Microbiology and Immunology, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH, USA
| | - Margaret E Ackerman
- Department of Microbiology and Immunology, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH, USA
- Thayer School of Engineering, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Is unmeasurable residual disease (uMRD) the best surrogate endpoint for clinical trials, regulatory approvals and therapy decisions in chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL)? Leukemia 2022; 36:2743-2747. [PMID: 36100641 DOI: 10.1038/s41375-022-01699-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/11/2022] [Revised: 08/31/2022] [Accepted: 09/02/2022] [Indexed: 11/08/2022]
|
4
|
Purna singh A, Shahapur PR, Vadakedath S, Bharadwaj VG, Kumar DP, Pinnelli VB, Godishala V, Kandi V. Research Question, Objectives, and Endpoints in Clinical and Oncological Research: A Comprehensive Review. Cureus 2022; 14:e29575. [PMID: 36312658 PMCID: PMC9595265 DOI: 10.7759/cureus.29575] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 09/25/2022] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
Clinical research is a systematic process of conducting research work to find solutions for human health-related problems. It is applied to understand the disease process and assist in the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention. Currently, we are experiencing global unrest caused by the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. The novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) has been responsible for the deaths of more than 50 million people worldwide. Also, it has resulted in severe morbidity among the affected population. The cause of such a huge amount of influence on human health by the pandemic was the unavailability of drugs and therapeutic interventions to treat and manage the disease. Cancer is a disease condition wherein the normal cell function is deranged, and the cells multiply in an uncontrolled manner. Based on recent reports by the World Health Organization (WHO), cancer is the second leading cause of death globally. Moreover, the rates of cancers have shown an increasing trend in the past decade. Therefore, it is essential to improve the understanding concerning clinical research to address the health concerns of humans. In this review, we comprehensively discuss critical aspects of clinical research that include the research question, research objectives, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), intention-to-treat and per-protocol analysis, and endpoints in clinical and oncological research.
Collapse
|
5
|
Dietz VA, Roberts N, Knox K, Moore S, Pitonak M, Barr C, Centeno J, Leininger S, New KC, Nowell P, Rodreick M, Geoffroy CG, Stampas A, Dulin JN. Fighting for recovery on multiple fronts: The past, present, and future of clinical trials for spinal cord injury. Front Cell Neurosci 2022; 16:977679. [PMID: 36212690 PMCID: PMC9533868 DOI: 10.3389/fncel.2022.977679] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/24/2022] [Accepted: 08/15/2022] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Valerie A. Dietz
- Department of Biology, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, United States
| | - Nolan Roberts
- Department of Biology, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, United States
| | - Katelyn Knox
- Department of Biology, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, United States
| | - Sherilynne Moore
- Department of Biology, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, United States
| | - Michael Pitonak
- Department of Biology, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, United States
| | - Chris Barr
- Unite 2 Fight Paralysis, Minneapolis, MN, United States
| | - Jesus Centeno
- Unite 2 Fight Paralysis, Minneapolis, MN, United States
| | | | - Kent C. New
- Unite 2 Fight Paralysis, Minneapolis, MN, United States
| | - Peter Nowell
- Unite 2 Fight Paralysis, Minneapolis, MN, United States
| | | | - Cedric G. Geoffroy
- Department of Neuroscience and Experimental Therapeutics, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, United States
- Texas A&M Institute for Neuroscience, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, United States
| | - Argyrios Stampas
- Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, UTHealth Houston McGovern Medical School, Houston, TX, United States
| | - Jennifer N. Dulin
- Department of Biology, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, United States
- Texas A&M Institute for Neuroscience, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, United States
| |
Collapse
|