Enhancing External Control Arm Analyses through Data Calibration and Hybrid Designs

Almost all external control arm analyses to contextualize findings of a single arm trial struggle with two key issues: the lack of baseline randomization, and equally important, the difference in data collection between the experimental arm with its primary data collection, and the external control arm using secondary data. We illustrate the data calibration design to remedy issues arising from differential measurements in the two arms, and discuss the hybrid design that expands an underpowered randomized internal control arm with real-world data to mitigate the lack of randomization of the external control arm. We show how the two approaches fit into an evidence-development strategy that naturally builds on the incremental insights gained.

Propensity score weighted multi-source exchangeability models for incorporating external control data in randomized clinical trials

Among clinical trialists, there has been a growing interest in using external data to improve decision-making and accelerate drug development in randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Here we propose a novel approach that combines the propensity score weighting (PW) and the multi-source exchangeability modelling (MEM) approaches to augment the control arm of a RCT in the rare disease setting. First, propensity score weighting is used to construct weighted external controls that have similar observed pre-treatment characteristics as the current trial population. Next, the MEM approach evaluates the similarity in outcome distributions between the weighted external controls and the concurrent control arm. The amount of external data we borrow is determined by the similarities in pretreatment characteristics and outcome distributions. The proposed approach can be applied to binary, continuous and count data. We evaluate the performance of the proposed PW-MEM method and several competing approaches based on simulation and re-sampling studies. Our results show that the PW-MEM approach improves the precision of treatment effect estimates while reducing the biases associated with borrowing data from external sources.

Do You Want to Stay Single? Considerations on Single-Arm Trials in Drug Development and the Postregulatory Space

Single-arm trials (SATs), while not preferred, remain in use throughout the drug development cycle. They may be accepted by regulators in particular contexts (e.g., in oncology or rare diseases) when the potential effects of new treatments are very large and placebo treatment is unethical. However, in the postregulatory space, SATs are common, and perhaps even more poorly suited to address the questions of interest. In this manuscript, we review regulatory and HTA positions on SATs; challenges posed by SATs to address research questions beyond regulators, evolving statistical methods to provide context for SATs, case studies where SATs could and could not address questions of interest, and communication strategies to influence decision making and optimize study design to address evidence needs.

Augmenting external control arms using Bayesian borrowing: a case study in first-line non-small cell lung cancer

Aim: This study aimed to improve comparative effectiveness estimates and discuss challenges encountered through the application of Bayesian borrowing (BB) methods to augment an external control arm (ECA) constructed from real-world data (RWD) using historical clinical trial data in first-line non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Materials & methods: An ECA for a randomized controlled trial (RCT) in first-line NSCLC was constructed using ConcertAI Patient360™ to assess chemotherapy with or without cetuximab, in the bevacizumab-inappropriate subpopulation. Cardinality matching was used to match patient characteristics between the treatment arm (cetuximab + chemotherapy) and ECA. Overall survival (OS) was assessed as the primary outcome using Cox proportional hazards (PH). BB was conducted using a static power prior under a Weibull PH parameterization with borrowing weights from 0.0 to 1.0 and augmentation of the ECA from a historical control trial. Results: The constructed ECA yielded a higher overall survival (OS) hazard ratio (HR) (HR = 1.53; 95% CI: 1.21-1.93) than observed in the matched population of the RCT (HR = 0.91; 95% CI: 0.73-1.13). The OS HR decreased through the incorporation of BB (HR = 1.30; 95% CI: 1.08-1.54, borrowing weight = 1.0). BB was applied to augment the RCT control arm via a historical control which improved the precision of the observed HR estimate (1.03; 95% CI: 0.86-1.22, borrowing weight = 1.0), in comparison to the matched population of the RCT alone. Conclusion: In this study, the RWD ECA was unable to successfully replicate the OS estimates from the matched population of the selected RCT. The inability to replicate could be due to unmeasured confounding and variations in time-periods, follow-up and subsequent therapy. Despite these findings, we demonstrate how BB can improve precision of comparative effectiveness estimates, potentially aid as a bias assessment tool and mitigate challenges of traditional methods when appropriate external data sources are available.

The Next Horizon of Drug Development: External Control Arms and Innovative Tools to Enrich Clinical Trial Data

Conducting clinical trials (CTs) has become increasingly costly and complex in terms of designing and operationalizing. These challenges exist in running CTs on novel therapies, particularly in oncology and rare diseases, where CTs increasingly target narrower patient groups. In this study, we describe external control arms (ECA) and other relevant tools, such as virtualization and decentralized clinical trials (DCTs), and the ability to follow the clinical trial subjects in the real world using tokenization. ECAs are typically constructed by identifying appropriate external sources of data, then by cleaning and standardizing it to create an analysis-ready data file, and finally, by matching subjects in the external data with the subjects in the CT of interest. In addition, ECA tools also include subject-level meta-analysis and simulated subjects' data for analyses. By implementing the recent advances in digital health technologies and devices, virtualization, and DCTs, realigning of CTs from site-centric designs to virtual, decentralized, and patient-centric designs can be done, which reduces the patient burden to participate in the CTs and encourages diversity. Tokenization technology allows linking the CT data with real-world data (RWD), creating more comprehensive and longitudinal outcome measures. These tools provide robust ways to enrich the CT data for informed decision-making, reduce the burden on subjects and costs of trial operations, and augment the insights gained for the CT data.

SECRETS: Subject-efficient clinical randomized controlled trials using synthetic intervention

Background

The parallel-group randomized controlled trial (RCT) is commonly used in Phase-3 clinical trials to establish treatment effectiveness but requires hundreds-to-thousands of subjects, making it difficult to implement, which leads to high Phase-3 trial failure rates. One approach to increasing power of a trial is to augment data collected from an RCT with external data from prospective studies or prior RCTs. However, this requires that external data be comparable to data from the study of interest, a condition that does not hold for new interventions or populations being studied. Another approach is to lower sample size requirements by using the cross-over design, which measures individual treatment effects (ITEs) to remove inter-subject variability; however, this design is only suitable for chronic conditions and interventions with effects that wash out rapidly.

Method

We propose a novel and practical framework called SECRETS (Subject-Efficient Clinical Randomized Controlled Trials using Synthetic Intervention) to increase power of any parallel-group RCT by simulating the cross-over design using only data collected from the study. SECRETS first estimates ITEs across all subjects recruited to the RCT by using a state-of-the-art counterfactual estimation algorithm called synthetic intervention (SI). Since SI induces dependencies among the ITEs, we introduce a novel hypothesis testing strategy to test for treatment effectiveness.

Results

We show that SECRETS can increase the power of an RCT while maintaining comparable significance levels; in particular, on three real-world clinical RCTs (Phase-3 trials), SECRETS increases power over the baseline method by 6 - 54 % (average: 21.5%, standard deviation: 15.8%), thereby reducing the number of subjects needed to obtain a typically desired statistical operating point of 80% power and 5% significance level by 25 - 76 % (10-3,957 fewer subjects per arm). Our analyses show that SECRETS increases power by consistently reducing the variance of the average treatment effect, thereby mimicking the effects of a cross-over design.

Conclusion

SECRETS increases subject efficiency of an RCT by simulating the cross-over design using only data collected from the RCT; therefore, it is a feasible solution for increasing the trial's power, especially under settings where satisfying sample size requirements is difficult.

Considerations for master protocols using external controls

There has been an increasing use of master protocols in oncology clinical trials because of its efficiency to accelerate cancer drug development and flexibility to accommodate multiple substudies. Depending on the study objective and design, a master protocol trial can be a basket trial, an umbrella trial, a platform trial, or any other form of trials in which multiple investigational products and/or subpopulations are studied under a single protocol. Master protocols can use external data and evidence (e.g. external controls) for treatment effect estimation, which can further improve efficiency of master protocol trials. This paper provides an overview of different types of external controls and their unique features when used in master protocols. Some key considerations in master protocols with external controls are discussed including construction of estimands, assessment of fit-for-use real-world data, and considerations for different types of master protocols. Similarities and differences between regular randomized controlled trials and master protocols when using external controls are discussed. A targeted learning-based causal roadmap is presented which constitutes three key steps: (1) define a target statistical estimand that aligns with the causal estimand for the study objective, (2) use an efficient estimator to estimate the target statistical estimand and its uncertainty, and (3) evaluate the impact of causal assumptions on the study conclusion by performing sensitivity analyses. Two illustrative examples for master protocols using external controls are discussed for their merits and possible improvement in causal effect estimation.

Evaluating hybrid controls methodology in early-phase oncology trials: A simulation study based on the MORPHEUS-UC trial

Phase Ib/II oncology trials, despite their small sample sizes, aim to provide information for optimal internal company decision-making concerning novel drug development. Hybrid controls (a combination of the current control arm and controls from one or more sources of historical trial data [HTD]) can be used to increase statistical precision. Here we assess combining two sources of Roche HTD to construct a hybrid control in targeted therapy for decision-making via an extensive simulation study. Our simulations are based on the real data of one of the experimental arms and the control arm of the MORPHEUS-UC Phase Ib/II study and two Roche HTD for atezolizumab monotherapy. We consider potential complications such as model misspecification, unmeasured confounding, different sample sizes of current treatment groups, and heterogeneity among the three trials. We evaluate two frequentist methods (with both Cox and Weibull accelerated failure time [AFT] models) and three different commensurate priors in Bayesian dynamic borrowing (with a Weibull AFT model), and modifications within each of those, when estimating the effect of treatment on survival outcomes and measures of effect such as marginal hazard ratios. We assess the performance of these methods in different settings and the potential of generalizations to supplement decisions in early-phase oncology trials. The results show that the proposed joint frequentist methods and noninformative priors within Bayesian dynamic borrowing with no adjustment on covariates are preferred, especially when treatment effects across the three trials are heterogeneous. For generalization of hybrid control methods in such settings, we recommend more simulation studies.

Using Bayesian Dynamic Borrowing to Maximize the Use of Existing Data: A Case-Study

Bayesian Dynamic Borrowing (BDB) designs are being increasingly used in clinical drug development. These methods offer a mathematically rigorous and robust approach to increase efficiency and strengthen evidence by integrating existing trial data into a new clinical trial. The regulatory acceptability of BDB is evolving and varies between and within regulatory agencies. This paper describes how BDB can be used to design a new randomised clinical trial including external data to supplement the planned sample size and discusses key considerations related to data re-use and BDB in drug development programs. A case-study illustrating the planning and evaluation of a BDB approach to support registration of a new medicine with the Center for Drug Evaluation in China will be presented. Key steps and considerations for the use of BDB will be discussed and evaluated, including how to decide whether it is appropriate to borrow external data, which external data can be re-used, the weight to put on the external data and how to decide if the new study has successfully demonstrated treatment benefit.

Dynamic enrichment of Bayesian small-sample, sequential, multiple assignment randomized trial design using natural history data: a case study from Duchenne muscular dystrophy

In Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) and other rare diseases, recruiting patients into clinical trials is challenging. Additionally, assigning patients to long-term, multi-year placebo arms raises ethical and trial retention concerns. This poses a significant challenge to the traditional sequential drug development paradigm. In this paper, we propose a small-sample, sequential, multiple assignment, randomized trial (snSMART) design that combines dose selection and confirmatory assessment into a single trial. This multi-stage design evaluates the effects of multiple doses of a promising drug and re-randomizes patients to appropriate dose levels based on their Stage 1 dose and response. Our proposed approach increases the efficiency of treatment effect estimates by (i) enriching the placebo arm with external control data, and (ii) using data from all stages. Data from external control and different stages are combined using a robust meta-analytic combined (MAC) approach to consider the various sources of heterogeneity and potential selection bias. We reanalyze data from a DMD trial using the proposed method and external control data from the Duchenne Natural History Study (DNHS). Our method's estimators show improved efficiency compared to the original trial. Also, the robust MAC-snSMART method most often provides more accurate estimators than the traditional analytic method. Overall, the proposed methodology provides a promising candidate for efficient drug development in DMD and other rare diseases.

Incorporation of healthy volunteers data on receptor occupancy into a phase II proof-of-concept trial using a Bayesian dynamic borrowing design

Receptor occupancy in targeted tissues measures the proportion of receptors occupied by a drug at equilibrium and is sometimes used as a surrogate of drug efficacy to inform dose selection in clinical trials. We propose to incorporate data on receptor occupancy from a phase I study in healthy volunteers into a phase II proof-of-concept study in patients, with the objective of using all the available evidence to make informed decisions. A minimal physiologically based pharmacokinetic modeling is used to model receptor occupancy in healthy volunteers and to predict it in the patients of a phase II proof-of-concept study, taking into account the variability of the population parameters and the specific differences arising from the pathological condition compared to healthy volunteers. Then, given an estimated relationship between receptor occupancy and the clinical endpoint, an informative prior distribution is derived for the clinical endpoint in both the treatment and control arms of the phase II study. These distributions are incorporated into a Bayesian dynamic borrowing design to supplement concurrent phase II trial data. A simulation study in immuno-inflammation demonstrates that the proposed design increases the power of the study while maintaining a type I error at acceptable levels for realistic values of the clinical endpoint.

Estimating the Potential Benefits of Confirmatory Trials for Drugs with Accelerated Approval: A Comprehensive Value of Information Framework

BACKGROUND

The US Food and Drug Administration's Accelerated Approval (AA) policy provides a pathway for patients to access potentially life-saving drugs rapidly. However, the use of surrogate endpoints, single-arm designs, and small sample sizes in preliminary trials that support AAs can lead to uncertainty regarding the clinical benefits of such drugs. This study aims to develop a comprehensive value of information (VOI) framework for assessing the potential benefits of future confirmatory trials, accounting for the various uncertainties inherent in preliminary trials.

METHODS

I formulated an expected value of information from confirmatory trial (EVICT) metric, which evaluates the potential benefits of a confirmatory trial that would reduce those uncertainties by using a clinically meaningful endpoint, a randomized control, and increased sample size. The EVICT metric can quantify the expected benefits of a well-designed confirmatory trial or an inadequately designed one that continues to use surrogate endpoints or single-arm design. The framework was illustrated using a hypothetical AA drug for metastatic breast cancer.

RESULTS

The case study demonstrates that a highly uncertain preliminary trial of an AA drug was associated with a substantial EVICT. A confirmatory trial with an increased sample size for this AA drug, utilizing a clinically meaningful endpoint and randomized control, yielded a population-level EVICT of $12.6 million. Persistently using a surrogate endpoint and single-arm trial design would reduce the EVICT by 60%.

CONCLUSIONS

This framework can provide accurate VOI estimates to guide coverage policies, value-based pricing, and the design of confirmatory trials for AA drugs.

Artificial intelligence for dementia drug discovery and trials optimization

Drug discovery and clinical trial design for dementia have historically been challenging. In part these challenges have arisen from patient heterogeneity, length of disease course, and the tractability of a target for the brain. Applying big data analytics and machine learning tools for drug discovery and utilizing them to inform successful clinical trial design has the potential to accelerate progress. Opportunities arise at multiple stages in the therapy pipeline and the growing availability of large medical data sets opens possibilities for big data analyses to answer key questions in clinical and therapeutic challenges. However, before this goal is reached, several challenges need to be overcome and only a multi-disciplinary approach can promote data-driven decision-making to its full potential. Herein we review the current state of machine learning applications to clinical trial design and drug discovery, while presenting opportunities and recommendations that can break down the barriers to implementation.

Case study of semaglutide and cardiovascular outcomes: An application of the Causal Roadmap to a hybrid design for augmenting an RCT control arm with real-world data

Introduction

Increasing interest in real-world evidence has fueled the development of study designs incorporating real-world data (RWD). Using the Causal Roadmap, we specify three designs to evaluate the difference in risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) with oral semaglutide versus standard-of-care: (1) the actual sequence of non-inferiority and superiority randomized controlled trials (RCTs), (2) a single RCT, and (3) a hybrid randomized-external data study.

Methods

The hybrid design considers integration of the PIONEER 6 RCT with RWD controls using the experiment-selector cross-validated targeted maximum likelihood estimator. We evaluate 95% confidence interval coverage, power, and average patient time during which participants would be precluded from receiving a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP1-RA) for each design using simulations. Finally, we estimate the effect of oral semaglutide on MACE for the hybrid PIONEER 6-RWD analysis.

Results

In simulations, Designs 1 and 2 performed similarly. The tradeoff between decreased coverage and patient time without the possibility of a GLP1-RA for Designs 1 and 3 depended on the simulated bias. In real data analysis using Design 3, external controls were integrated in 84% of cross-validation folds, resulting in an estimated risk difference of -1.53%-points (95% CI -2.75%-points to -0.30%-points).

Conclusions

The Causal Roadmap helps investigators to minimize potential bias in studies using RWD and to quantify tradeoffs between study designs. The simulation results help to interpret the level of evidence provided by the real data analysis in support of the superiority of oral semaglutide versus standard-of-care for cardiovascular risk reduction.

Review article: Externally derived control arms-An opportunity for clinical trials in inflammatory bowel disease?

BACKGROUND

One of the greatest challenges in the current IBD clinical trial landscape is, perhaps, the recruitment and retention of eligible participants. Seamless testing of promising investigational compounds is paramount to address unmet needs, but this is hindered by a number of barriers, particularly patient concerns of placebo assignment.

AIMS

To review the use of novel trial designs leveraging externally derived data to synthetically create control groups or augment existing ones, and to summarise the regulatory position on the use of external controls for market authorisation.

METHODS

We conducted a PubMed literature search without restriction using search terms such as 'external controls' and 'historical controls' to identify relevant articles.

RESULTS

External controls are increasingly being used outside the context of cancer and rare diseases, including IBD, and increasingly recognised by regulatory bodies. Such designs, particularly in earlier phase trials, can inform key nodes in drug development and permit evaluating efficacy of interventions without combating the ethical and numerical enrolment challenges described. However, the lack of randomisation and blinding subjects them to significant bias. Groups require robust statistical and computational approaches to ensure patient-level data across groups are adequately balanced.

CONCLUSIONS

While this approach has several pitfalls, and is not robust enough to replace traditional randomised, placebo-controlled trials, it may offer a compromise to address key research questions at a more rapid pace, with fewer patients, and lower cost.

Design and Statistical Innovations in a Platform Trial for Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis

Platform trials allow efficient evaluation of multiple interventions for a specific disease. The HEALEY ALS Platform Trial is testing multiple investigational products in parallel and sequentially in persons with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) with the goal of rapidly identifying novel treatments to slow disease progression. Platform trials have considerable operational and statistical efficiencies compared with typical randomized controlled trials due to their use of shared infrastructure and shared control data. We describe the statistical approaches required to achieve the objectives of a platform trial in the context of ALS. This includes following regulatory guidance for the disease area of interest and accounting for potential differences in outcomes of participants within the shared control (potentially due to differences in time of randomization, mode of administration, and eligibility criteria). Within the HEALEY ALS Platform Trial, the complex statistical objectives are met using a Bayesian shared parameter analysis of function and survival. This analysis serves to provide a common integrated estimate of treatment benefit, overall slowing in disease progression, as measured by function and survival while accounting for potential differences in the shared control group using Bayesian hierarchical modeling. Clinical trial simulation is used to provide a better understanding of this novel analysis method and complex design. ANN NEUROL 2023;94:547-560.

Regulatory and HTA Considerations for Development of Real-World Data Derived External Controls

Regulators and Health Technology Assessment (HTA) bodies are increasingly familiar with, and publishing guidance on, external controls derived from real-world data (RWD) to generate real-world evidence (RWE). We recently conducted a systematic literature review (SLR) evaluating publicly available information on the use of RWD-derived external controls to contextualize outcomes from uncontrolled trials submitted to the European Medicines Agency (EMA), the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and/or select HTA bodies. The review identified several key operational and methodological aspects for which more detailed guidance and alignment within and between regulatory agencies and HTA bodies is necessary. This paper builds on the SLR findings by delineating a set of key takeaways for the responsible generation of fit-for-purpose RWE. Practical methodological and operational guidelines for designing, conducting, and reporting RWD-derived external control studies are explored and discussed. These considerations include: (i) early engagement with regulators and HTA bodies during the study planning phase; (ii) consideration of the appropriateness and comparability of external controls across multiple dimensions, including eligibility criteria, temporality, population representation, and clinical evaluation; (iii) ensuring adequate sample sizes, including hypothesis testing considerations; (iv) implementation of a clear and transparent strategy for assessing and addressing data quality, including data missingness across trials and RWD; (v) selection of comparable and meaningful endpoints that are operationalized and analyzed using appropriate analytic methods; and (vi) conduct of sensitivity analyses to assess the robustness of findings in the context of uncertainty and sources of potential bias.

A model-based approach for historical borrowing, with an application to neovascular age-related macular degeneration

Bayesian historical borrowing has recently attracted growing interest due to the increasing availability of historical control data, as well as improved computational methodology and software. In this article, we argue that the statistical models used for borrowing may be suboptimal when they do not adjust for differing factors across historical studies such as covariates, dosing regimen, etc. We propose an alternative approach to address these shortcomings. We start by constructing a historical model based on subject-level historical data to accurately characterize the control treatment by adjusting for known between trials differences. This model is subsequently used to predict the control arm response in the current trial, enabling the derivation of a model-informed prior for the treatment effect parameter of another (potentially simpler) model used to analyze the trial efficacy (i.e. the trial model). Our approach is applied to neovascular age-related macular degeneration trials, employing a cross-sectional regression trial model, and a longitudinal non-linear mixed-effects drug-disease-trial historical model. The latter model characterizes the relationship between clinical response, drug exposure and baseline covariates so that the derived model-informed prior seamlessly adapts to the trial population and can be extrapolated to a different dosing regimen. This approach can yield a more accurate prior for borrowing, thus optimizing gains in efficiency (e.g. increasing power or reducing the sample size) in future trials.

Dynamic use of historical controls in clinical trials for rare disease research: A re-evaluation of the MILES trial

BACKGROUND

Randomized controlled trials offer the best design for eliminating bias in estimating treatment effects but can be slow and costly in rare disease research. Additionally, an equal randomization approach may not be optimal in studies in which prior evidence of superiority of one or more treatments exist. Supplementing prospectively enrolled, concurrent controls with historical controls can reduce recruitment requirements and provide patients a higher likelihood of enrolling in a new and possibly superior treatment arm. Appropriate methods need to be employed to ensure comparability of concurrent and historical controls to minimize bias and variability in the treatment effect estimates and reduce the chances of drawing incorrect conclusions regarding treatment benefit.

METHODS

MILES was a phase III placebo-controlled trial employing 1:1 randomization that led to US Food and Drug Administration approval of sirolimus for treating patients with lymphangioleiomyomatosis. We re-analyzed the MILES trial data to learn whether substituting concurrent controls with controls from a historical registry could have accelerated subject enrollment while leading to similar study conclusions. We used propensity score matching to identify exchangeable historical controls from a registry balancing the baseline characteristics of the two control groups. This allowed more new patients to be assigned to the sirolimus arm. We used trial data and simulations to estimate key outcomes under an array of alternative designs.

RESULTS

Borrowing information from historical controls would have allowed the trial to enroll fewer concurrent controls while leading to the same conclusion reached in the trial. Simulations showed similar statistical performance for borrowing as for the actual trial design without producing type I error inflation and preserving power for the same study size when concurrent and historical controls are comparable.

CONCLUSION

Substituting concurrent controls with propensity score-matched historical controls can allow more prospectively enrolled patients to be assigned to the active treatment and enable the trial to be conducted with smaller overall sample size, while maintaining covariate balance and study power and minimizing bias in response estimation. This approach does not fully eliminate the concern that introducing non-randomized historical controls in a trial may lead to bias in estimating treatment effects, and should be carefully considered on a case-by-case basis. Borrowing historical controls is best suited when conducting randomized controlled trials with conventional designs is challenging, as in rare disease research. High-quality data on covariates and outcomes must be available for candidate historical controls to ensure the validity of these designs. Additional precautions are needed to maintain blinding of the treatment assignment and to ensure comparability in the assessment of treatment safety.MILES ClinicalTrials.gov Number: NCT00414648.

Emulating Randomized Controlled Trials with Hybrid Control Arms in Oncology: A Case Study

This proof-of-concept study retrospectively assessed the feasibility of applying a hybrid control arm design to a completed phase III randomized controlled trial (RCT; CheckMate-057) in advanced non-small cell lung cancer using a real-world data (RWD) source. The emulated trial consists of an experimental arm (patients from the RCT experimental cohort) and a hybrid control arm (patients from the RCT and RWD control cohorts). For the RWD control cohort, this study used a nationwide electronic health record-derived de-identified database. Three frequentist statistical borrowing methods were evaluated: a two-step Cox model, a fixed Cox model, and propensity score-integrated composite likelihood ("Methods 1-3"). The experimental treatment effect for hybrid control designs were evaluated using hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence interval (CI) estimated from the Cox models accounting for covariate differences. The reduction in study duration compared to the RCT was also evaluated. All three statistical borrowing methods achieved comparable experimental treatment effects to that observed in the CheckMate-057 clinical trial, with HRs of 0.73 (95% CI: 0.59, 0.92), 0.74 (95% CI: 0.61, 0.91), 0.72 (95% CI: 0.59, 0.88) for Methods 1-3, respectively. Reduction in study duration time was 99-115 days when borrowing 30-38 events for Methods 1-3, respectively. This study demonstrated that it is feasible to emulate an RCT using a hybrid control arm design using three frequentist propensity-score based statistical borrowing methods. Selection of an appropriate, fit-for-use RWD cohort is critical to minimizing bias in experimental treatment effect.

Current perspectives for external control arms in oncology clinical trials: Analysis of EMA approvals 2016-2021

Leveraging external control data, especially real-world data (RWD), has drawn particular attention in recent years for facilitating oncology clinical development and regulatory decision-making. Medical regulators have published guidance on accelerating the use of RWD and external controls. However, few systematic discussions have been conducted on external controls in cancer drug submissions and regulatory feedback. This study aimed to identify European oncology drug approvals using external control data to demonstrate clinical efficacy. We included 18 eligible submissions employing 24 external controls and then discussed the use of external control, data sources, analysis methods, and regulators' feedback. The external controls have been actively submitted to the European Medical Agency (EMA) recently. We found that 17 % of the EMA-approved cancer drugs in 2016-2021 used external controls, among which 37 % of the cases leveraged RWD. However, nearly one-third of the external controls were not considered supportive evidence by EMA due to limitations regarding heterogeneous patient populations, missing outcome assessment in RWD, and inappropriate statistical analysis. This study highlighted that proper use of external controls requires a careful assessment of clinical settings, data availability, and statistical methodology. For better use of external controls in oncology clinical trials, we recommend: prospective study designs to avoid selection bias, sufficient baseline data to ensure the comparability of study populations, consistent endpoint measurements to enable outcome comparison, robust statistical methodology for comparative analysis, and collaborative efforts of sponsors and regulators to establish regulatory frameworks.

Hurdles and signposts on the road to virtual control groups-A case study illustrating the influence of anesthesia protocols on electrolyte levels in rats

Introduction: Virtual Control Groups (VCGs) represent the concept of using historical control data from legacy animal studies to replace concurrent control group (CCG) animals. Based on the data curation and sharing activities of the Innovative Medicine Initiatives project eTRANSAFE (enhancing TRANSlational SAFEty Assessment through Integrative Knowledge Management) the ViCoG working group was established with the objectives of i) collecting suitable historical control data sets from preclinical toxicity studies, ii) evaluating statistical methodologies for building adequate and regulatory acceptable VCGs from historical control data, and iii) sharing those control-group data across multiple pharmaceutical companies. During the qualification process of VCGs a particular focus was put on the identification of hidden confounders in the data sets, which might impair the adequate matching of VCGs with the CCG. Methods: During our analyses we identified such a hidden confounder, namely, the choice of the anesthetic procedure used in animal experiments before blood withdrawal. Anesthesia using CO₂ may elevate the levels of some electrolytes such as calcium in blood, while the use of isoflurane is known to lower these values. Identification of such hidden confounders is particularly important if the underlying experimental information (e.g., on the anesthetic procedure) is not routinely recorded in the standard raw data files, such as SEND (Standard for Exchange of Non-clinical Data). We therefore analyzed how the replacement of CCGs with VCGs would affect the reproducibility of treatment-related findings regarding electrolyte values (potassium, calcium, sodium, and phosphate). The analyses were performed using a legacy rat systemic toxicity study consisting of a control and three treatment groups conducted according to pertinent OECD guidelines. In the report of this study treatment-related hypercalcemia was reported. The rats in this study were anesthetized with isoflurane. Results: Replacing the CCGs with VCGs derived from studies comprising both anesthetics resulted in a shift of control electrolyte parameters. Instead of the originally reported hypercalcemia the use of VCG led to fallacious conclusions of no observed effect or hypocalcemia. Discussion: Our study highlights the importance of a rigorous statistical analysis including the detection and elimination of hidden confounders prior to the implementation of the VCG concept.

Causal inference for longitudinal data based on historical controls

Use of historical data has become a hot topic recently, considered to provide a way to reduce patient burden, lower drug development cost, and make innovative therapies available to patients earlier. In a single-arm study designed to examine the benefit of an experimental treatment, there is often a desire to compare the outcomes of patients receiving the new intervention with those receiving a control treatment, which can be extracted from sources such as historical trials or electronic medical records. Since the treatment is not randomly assigned, there is a need to adjust for the potential imbalance in key patient characteristics between the current study and historical controls. If the outcome of interest is measured longitudinally and subject to random missing, the required adjustment becomes more complicated. In this paper, we propose a doubly robust adjustment procedure specifically designed for longitudinal data analysis with missing data. The proposed method yields valid analysis results, if either the propensity score model or the mixed effects model for repeated measures (MMRM) regression model is correctly specified. An extensive numerical study is conducted to examine the performance of the proposed method. Data from a real clinical trial comparing with historical data are analyzed as an example applying the proposed procedure.

External Comparator Groups Derived from Real-world Data Used in Support of Regulatory Decision Making: Use Cases and Challenges

Real-world data (RWD) from electronic health records (EHRs) and administrative claims databases are used increasingly to generate real-world evidence (RWE). RWE is used to support clinical evidence packages for medicines that inform decision-makers. In this review of current issues in the use of RWD-derived external comparator groups to support regulatory filings, we assess a series of topics that generally apply across many disease indications. However, most of the examples and illustrations focus on the oncology clinical research setting. The topics include an overview of current uses of RWD in drug development, a discussion of regulatory filings using RWD-derived external comparators, a brief overview of guidance documents and white papers pertaining to external comparators, a summary of some limitations and methodological issues in the use of external comparator groups and finally, a look at the future of this area and recommendations.

Enhanced Telehealth Home-Monitoring Intervention for Vulnerable and Frail Patients after Cardiac Surgery (THE-FACS Pilot Intervention Study)

Background

Frail cardiac surgery patients have an increased risk of worse postoperative outcomes. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the implementation of a novel Telehealth Home monitoring Enhanced-Frailty And Cardiac Surgery (THE-FACS) intervention and determine its impact on clinical outcomes in frail patients post-cardiac surgery.

Methods

Frail/vulnerable patients defined by Edmonton Frailty Scale (EFS > 4) undergoing cardiac surgery were prospectively enrolled (November 2019 -March 2020) at the New Brunswick Heart Centre. Exclusion criteria included age < 55 years, emergent status, minimally invasive surgery, lack of home support, and > 10-days postoperative hospital stay. Following standard training on THE-FACS, participants were sent home with a tablet device to answer questions about their health/recovery and measure blood pressure for 30-consecutive days. Transmitted data were monitored by trained cardiac surgery follow-up nurses. Patients were contacted only if the algorithm based on the patient’s self-collected data triggered an alert. Patients who completed the study were compared to historical controls. The primary outcome of interest was to determine the number of patients that could complete THE-FACS; secondary outcomes included participant/caregiver satisfaction and impact on hospital readmission.

Results

We identified 86 eligible (EFS > 4), out of 254 patients scheduled for elective cardiac surgery during the study period (vulnerable: 34%). The patients who consented to participate in THE-FACS (64/86, 74%) had a mean age of 69.1 ± 6.4 years, 25% were female, 79.7% underwent isolated Coronary Artery Bypass Graft (CABG) and median EFS was 6 (5–8). 29/64 (45%) were excluded post-enrollment due to prolonged hospitalization (15/64) or requirement for hospital-to-hospital transfer (12/64). Of the remaining 35 patients, 21 completed the 30-day follow-up (completion rate:60%). Reasons for withdrawal (14/35, 40%) were mostly due to technical difficulties with the tablet. Hospital readmission, although non-significant, was reduced in THE-FACS participants compared to controls (0% vs. 14.3%). A satisfaction survey revealed > 90% satisfaction and ~ 67% willingness to re-use a home monitoring device.

Conclusions

THE-FACS intervention can be used to successfully monitor vulnerable patients returning home post-cardiac surgery. However, a significant number of frail patients could not benefit from THE-FACS given prolonged hospitalization and technological challenges. Our findings suggest that despite overall excellent satisfaction in participants who completed THE-FACS, there remain major challenges for wide-scale implementation of technology-driven home monitoring programs as only 24% completed the study.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12877-022-03531-4.

Increasing the efficiency of randomized trial estimates via linear adjustment for a prognostic score

Estimating causal effects from randomized experiments is central to clinical research. Reducing the statistical uncertainty in these analyses is an important objective for statisticians. Registries, prior trials, and health records constitute a growing compendium of historical data on patients under standard-of-care that may be exploitable to this end. However, most methods for historical borrowing achieve reductions in variance by sacrificing strict type-I error rate control. Here, we propose a use of historical data that exploits linear covariate adjustment to improve the efficiency of trial analyses without incurring bias. Specifically, we train a prognostic model on the historical data, then estimate the treatment effect using a linear regression while adjusting for the trial subjects' predicted outcomes (their prognostic scores). We prove that, under certain conditions, this prognostic covariate adjustment procedure attains the minimum variance possible among a large class of estimators. When those conditions are not met, prognostic covariate adjustment is still more efficient than raw covariate adjustment and the gain in efficiency is proportional to a measure of the predictive accuracy of the prognostic model above and beyond the linear relationship with the raw covariates. We demonstrate the approach using simulations and a reanalysis of an Alzheimer's disease clinical trial and observe meaningful reductions in mean-squared error and the estimated variance. Lastly, we provide a simplified formula for asymptotic variance that enables power calculations that account for these gains. Sample size reductions between 10% and 30% are attainable when using prognostic models that explain a clinically realistic percentage of the outcome variance.

The Randomised Controlled Trial at the Intersection of Research Ethics and Innovation

The randomised controlled trial (RCT) has been considered for a long time as the gold standard for evidence generation to support regulatory decision making for medicines. The randomisation procedure involves an ethical dilemma since it means leaving the treatment choice to chance. Although currently contested, the ethical justification for the RCT that has gained widespread acceptance is the notion of 'clinical equipoise'. This state exists when "there is no consensus within the expert clinical community about the comparative merits of the alternatives to be tested"; it is argued that this confers the ethical grounds for the conduct of an RCT. The prominent position of the RCT is being challenged by new therapeutic modalities for which this study design may be unsuitable. Moreover, alternative approaches to evidence generation represent another area where innovation may have implications for the relevance of the RCT. Against the backdrop of the debate around the equipoise principle and some recent therapeutic and data analytical innovations, the aim of this article is to explore the current standing of the RCT from a regulatory perspective.

A Review of Causal Inference for External Comparator Arm Studies

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the gold standard design to establish the efficacy of new drugs and to support regulatory decision making. However, a marked increase in the submission of single-arm trials (SATs) has been observed in recent years, especially in the field of oncology due to the trend towards precision medicine contributing to the rise of new therapeutic interventions for rare diseases. SATs lack results for control patients, and information from external sources can be compiled to provide context for better interpretability of study results. External comparator arm (ECA) studies are defined as a clinical trial (most commonly a SAT) and an ECA of a comparable cohort of patients-commonly derived from real-world settings including registries, natural history studies, or medical records of routine care. This publication aims to provide a methodological overview, to sketch emergent best practice recommendations and to identify future methodological research topics. Specifically, existing scientific and regulatory guidance for ECA studies is reviewed and appropriate causal inference methods are discussed. Further topics include sample size considerations, use of estimands, handling of different data sources regarding differential baseline covariate definitions, differential endpoint measurements and timings. In addition, unique features of ECA studies are highlighted, specifically the opportunity to address bias caused by unmeasured ECA covariates, which are available in the SAT.

Hybrid-control arm construction using historical trial data for an early-phase, randomized controlled trial in metastatic colorectal cancer

Background

Treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer patients beyond the second line remains challenging, highlighting the need for early phase trials of combination therapies for patients who had disease progression during or following two prior lines of therapy. Leveraging hybrid control design in these trials may preserve the benefits of randomization while strengthening evidence by integrating historical trial data. Few examples have been established to assess the applicability of such design in supporting early phase metastatic colorectal cancer trials.

Methods

MORPHEUS-CRC is an umbrella, multicenter, open-label, phase Ib/II, randomized, controlled trial (NCT03555149), with active experimental arms ongoing. Patients enrolled were assigned to a control arm (regorafenib, 15 patients randomized and 13 analysed) or multiple experimental arms for immunotherapy-based treatment combinations. One experimental arm (atezolizumab + isatuximab, 15 patients randomized and analysed) was completed and included in the hybrid-control study, where the hybrid-control arm was constructed by integrating data from the IMblaze370 phase 3 trial (NCT02788279). To estimate treatment efficacy, Cox and logistic regression models were used in a frequentist framework with standardized mortality ratio weighting or in a Bayesian framework with commensurate priors. The primary endpoint is objective response rate, while disease control rate, progression-free survival, and overall survival were the outcomes assessed in the hybrid-control study.

Results

The experimental arm showed no efficacy signal, yet a well-tolerated safety profile in the MORPHEUS-CRC trial. Treatment effects estimated in hybrid control design were comparable to those in the MORPHEUS-CRC trial using either frequentist or Bayesian models.

Conclusions

Hybrid control provides comparable treatment-effect estimates with generally improved precision, and thus can be of value to inform early-phase clinical development in metastatic colorectal cancer.

From innovative thinking to pharmaceutical industry implementation: Some success stories

In industry, successful innovation involves not only developing new statistical methodology, but also ensuring that this methodology is implemented successfully. This includes enabling applied statisticians to understand the method, its benefits and limitations and empowering them to implement the new method. This will include advocacy, influencing in-house and external stakeholders, such that these stakeholders are receptive to the new methodology. In this paper, we describe some industry successes and focus on our colleague, Andy Grieve's role in these.

Bayesian Design of Superiority Trials: Methods and Applications

In this paper, we lay out the basic elements of Bayesian sample size determination (SSD) for the Bayesian design of a two-arm superiority clinical trial. We develop a flowchart of the Bayesian SSD that highlights the critical components of a Bayesian design and provides a practically useful roadmap for designing a Bayesian clinical trial in real world applications. We empirically examine the amount of borrowing, the choice of noninformative priors, and the impact of model misspecification on the Bayesian type I error and power. A formal and statistically rigorous formulation of conditional borrowing within the decision rule framework is developed. Moreover, by extending the partial borrowing power priors, a new borrowing-by-parts power prior for incorporating historical data is proposed. Computational algorithms are also developed to calculate the Bayesian type I error and power. Extensive simulation studies are carried out to explore the operating characteristics of the proposed Bayesian design of a superiority trial.

Real-World Data as External Controls: Practical Experience from Notable Marketing Applications of New Therapies

INTRODUCTION

Real-world data (RWD) can contextualize findings from single-arm trials when randomized comparative trials are unethical or unfeasible. Findings from single-arm trials alone are difficult to interpret and a comparison, when feasible and meaningful, to patient-level information from RWD facilitates the evaluation. As such, there have been several recent regulatory applications including RWD or other external data to support the product's efficacy and safety. This paper summarizes some lessons learned from such contextualization from 20 notable new drug or biologic licensing applications in oncology and rare diseases.

METHODS

This review focuses on 20 notable new drug or biologic licensing applications that included patient-level RWD or other external data for contextualization of trial results. Publicly available regulatory documents including clinical and statistical reviews, advisory committee briefing materials and minutes, and approved product labeling were retrieved for each application. The authors conducted independent assessments of these documents focusing on the regulatory evaluation, in each case. Three examples are presented in detail to illustrate the salient issues and themes identified across applications.

RESULTS

Regulatory decisions were strongly influenced by the quality and usability of the RWD. Comparability of cohort attributes such as endpoints, populations, follow-up, index and censoring criteria, as well as data completeness and accuracy of key variables appeared to be essential to ensure the quality and relevance of the RWD. Given adequate sample size of the clinical trials or external control, the use of appropriate analytic methods to properly account for confounding, such as regression or matching, and pre-specification of these methods while blinded to patient outcomes seemed good strategies to address baseline differences.

DISCUSSION

Contextualizing single-arm trials with patient-level RWD appears to be an advance in regulatory science; however, challenges remain. Statisticians and epidemiologists have long focused on analytical methods for comparative effectiveness but hurdles in use of RWD have often occurred upstream of the analyses. More specifically, we noted hurdles in evaluating data quality, justifying cohort selection or initiation of follow-up, and demonstrating comparability of cohorts and endpoints.

Preventing amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: insights from pre-symptomatic neurodegenerative diseases

Significant progress has been made in understanding the pre-symptomatic phase of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. While much is still unknown, advances in other neurodegenerative diseases offer valuable insights. Indeed, it is increasingly clear that the well-recognized clinical syndromes of Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, Huntington's disease, spinal muscular atrophy and frontotemporal dementia are also each preceded by a pre-symptomatic or prodromal period of varying duration, during which the underlying disease process unfolds, with associated compensatory changes and loss of inherent system redundancy. Key insights from these diseases highlight opportunities for discovery in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. The development of biomarkers reflecting amyloid and tau has led to a shift in defining Alzheimer's disease based on inferred underlying histopathology. Parkinson's disease is unique among neurodegenerative diseases in the number and diversity of non-genetic biomarkers of pre-symptomatic disease, most notably REM sleep behaviour disorder. Huntington's disease benefits from an ability to predict the likely timing of clinically manifest disease based on age and CAG-repeat length alongside reliable neuroimaging markers of atrophy. Spinal muscular atrophy clinical trials have highlighted the transformational value of early therapeutic intervention, and studies in frontotemporal dementia illustrate the differential role of biomarkers based on genotype. Similar advances in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis would transform our understanding of key events in pathogenesis, thereby dramatically accelerating progress towards disease prevention. Deciphering the biology of pre-symptomatic amyotrophic lateral sclerosis relies on a clear conceptual framework for defining the earliest stages of disease. Clinically manifest amyotrophic lateral sclerosis may emerge abruptly, especially among those who harbour genetic mutations associated with rapidly progressive amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. However, the disease may also evolve more gradually, revealing a prodromal period of mild motor impairment preceding phenoconversion to clinically manifest disease. Similarly, cognitive and behavioural impairment, when present, may emerge gradually, evolving through a prodromal period of mild cognitive impairment or mild behavioural impairment before progression to amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Biomarkers are critically important to studying pre-symptomatic amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and essential to efforts to intervene therapeutically before clinically manifest disease emerges. The use of non-genetic biomarkers, however, presents challenges related to counselling, informed consent, communication of results and limited protections afforded by existing legislation. Experiences from pre-symptomatic genetic testing and counselling, and the legal protections against discrimination based on genetic data, may serve as a guide. Building on what we have learned-more broadly from other pre-symptomatic neurodegenerative diseases and specifically from amyotrophic lateral sclerosis gene mutation carriers-we present a road map to early intervention, and perhaps even disease prevention, for all forms of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis.

Bayesian adaptive randomization design incorporating propensity score-matched historical controls

Incorporating historical control data to augment the control arm in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) is one way of increasing their efficiency and feasibility when adequate RCTs cannot be conducted. In recent work, a Bayesian adaptive randomization design incorporating historical control data has been proposed to reduce sample size according to the amount of information that could be borrowed, assessed at interim assessment in respect to prior-data conflict. However, the approach does not distinguish between the two sources of prior-data conflict: (1) imbalance in measured covariates, and (2) imbalance in unmeasured covariates. In this paper, we propose an extension of the Bayesian adaptive randomization design to incorporate propensity score-matched historical controls. At interim assessment, historical controls similar to the concurrent controls in terms of measured covariates are selected using propensity score matching. Then, final sample size of the control arm is adjusted according to the extent of borrowing from the matched historical controls quantified by effective historical sample size. The conditional power prior approach and commensurate prior approach are adopted for designing the prior, and addressing prior-data conflict due to unmeasured covariate imbalance. Simulation results show that the proposed method yields reduced bias in treatment effect estimates, type I error at the nominal level, and reduced sample size while maintaining statistical power. Even when residual imbalance exists due to unmeasured covariates, the proposed method borrowed more information without risking substantially inflated type I error and bias, providing meaningful implications for use of historical controls to facilitate the conduct of adequate RCTs.

The use of external control data for predictions and futility interim analyses in clinical trials

BACKGROUND

External control (EC) data from completed clinical trials and electronic health records can be valuable for the design and analysis of future clinical trials. We discuss the use of EC data for early stopping decisions in randomized clinical trials (RCTs).

METHODS

We specify interim analyses (IAs) approaches for RCTs, which allow investigators to integrate external data into early futility stopping decisions. IAs utilize predictions based on early data from the RCT, possibly combined with external data. These predictions at IAs express the probability that the trial will generate significant evidence of positive treatment effects. The trial is discontinued if this predictive probability becomes smaller than a prespecified threshold. We quantify efficiency gains and risks associated with the integration of external data into interim decisions. We then analyze a collection of glioblastoma (GBM) data sets, to investigate if the balance of efficiency gains and risks justify the integration of external data into the IAs of future GBM RCTs.

RESULTS

Our analyses illustrate the importance of accounting for potential differences between the distributions of prognostic variables in the RCT and in the external data to effectively leverage external data for interim decisions. Using GBM data sets, we estimate that the integration of external data increases the probability of early stopping of ineffective experimental treatments by up to 25% compared to IAs that do not leverage external data. Additionally, we observe a reduction of the probability of early discontinuation for effective experimental treatments, which improves the RCT power.

CONCLUSION

Leveraging external data for IAs in RCTs can support early stopping decisions and reduce the number of enrolled patients when the experimental treatment is ineffective.

Application of Real-World Data to External Control Groups in Oncology Clinical Trial Drug Development

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assess overall survival are considered the "gold standard" when evaluating the efficacy and safety of a new oncology intervention. However, single-arm trials that use surrogate endpoints (e.g., objective response rate or duration of response) to evaluate clinical benefit have become the basis for accelerated or breakthrough regulatory approval of precision oncology drugs for cases where the target and research populations are relatively small. Interpretation of efficacy in single-arm trials can be challenging because such studies lack a standard-of-care comparator arm. Although an external control group can be based on data from other clinical trials, using an external control group based on data collected outside of a trial may not only offer an alternative to both RCTs and uncontrolled single-arm trials, but it may also help improve decision-making by study sponsors or regulatory authorities. Hence, leveraging real-world data (RWD) to construct external control arms in clinical trials that investigate the efficacy and safety of drug interventions in oncology has become a topic of interest. Herein, we review the benefits and challenges associated with the use of RWD to construct external control groups, and the relevance of RWD to early oncology drug development.

Exploring the Potential of External Control Arms created from Patient Level Data: A case study in non-small cell lung cancer

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the gold standard for evaluation of new medical products. However, RCTs may not always be ethical or feasible. In cases where the investigational product is available outside the trial (e.g., through accelerated approval), patients may fail to enroll in clinical trials or drop out early to take the investigational product. These challenges to enrolling or maintaining a concurrent control arm may compromise timely recruitment, retention, or compliance. This can threaten the study's integrity, including the validity of results. External control arms (ECAs) may be a promising augmentation to RCTs when encountered with challenges that threaten the feasibility and reliability of a randomized controlled clinical trial. Here, we propose the use of ECAs created from patient-level data from previously conducted clinical trials or real-world data in the same indication. Propensity score methods are used to balance observed disease characteristics and demographics in the previous clinical trial or real-world data with those of present-day trial participants assigned to receive the investigational product. These methods are explored in a case study in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) derived from multiple previously conducted open label or blinded phase 2 and 3 multinational clinical trials initiated between 2004 and 2013. The case study indicated that when balanced for baseline characteristics, the overall survival estimates from the ECA were very similar to those of the target randomized control, based on Kaplan-Meier curves and hazard ratio and confidence interval estimates. This suggests that in the future, a randomized control may be able to be augmented by an ECA without compromising the understanding of the treatment effect, assuming sufficient knowledge, measurement, and availability of all or most of the important prognostic variables.

An Overview of Phase 2 Clinical Trial Designs

Clinical trials are studies to test new treatments in humans. Typically, these treatments are evaluated over several phases to assess their safety and efficacy. Phase 1 trials are designed to evaluate the safety and tolerability of a new treatment, typically with a small number of patients (eg, 20-80), generally spread across several dose levels. Phase 2 trials are designed to determine whether the new treatment has sufficiently promising efficacy to warrant further investigation in a large-scale randomized phase 3 trial, as well as to further assess safety. These studies usually involve a few hundred patients. This article provides an overview of some of the most commonly used phase 2 designs for clinical trials and emphasizes their critical elements and considerations. Key references to some of the most commonly used phase 2 designs are given to allow the reader to explore in more detail the critical aspects when planning a phase 2 trial. A comparison of 3 potential designs in the context of the NRG-HN002 trial is presented to complement the discussion about phase 2 trials.

Calibrated dynamic borrowing using capping priors

Multisource exchangeability models (MEMs), a BayeTsian approach for dynamically integrating information from multiple clinical trials, are a promising approach for gaining efficiency in randomized controlled trials. When the supplementary trials are considerably larger than the primary trial, care must be taken when integrating supplementary data to avoid overwhelming the primary trial. In this paper, we propose "capping priors," which controls the extent of dynamic borrowing by placing an a priori cap on the effective supplemental sample size. We demonstrate the behavior of this technique via simulation, and apply our method to four randomized trials of very low nicotine content cigarettes.

The Use of External Controls in FDA Regulatory Decision Making

The regulatory standards of the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) require substantial evidence of effectiveness from adequate and well-controlled trials that typically use a valid comparison to an internal concurrent control. However, when it is not feasible or ethical to use an internal control, particularly in rare disease populations, relying on external controls may be acceptable. To better understand the use of external controls to support product development and approval, we reviewed FDA regulatory approval decisions between 2000 and 2019 for drug and biologic products to identify pivotal studies that leveraged external controls, with a focus on select therapeutic areas. Forty-five approvals were identified where FDA accepted external control data in their benefit/risk assessment; they did so for many reasons including the rare nature of the disease, ethical concerns regarding use of a placebo or no-treatment arm, the seriousness of the condition, and the high unmet medical need. Retrospective natural history data, including retrospective reviews of patient records, was the most common source of external control (44%). Other types of external control were baseline control (33%); published data (11%); and data from a previous clinical study (11%). To gain further insights, a comprehensive evaluation of selected approvals utilizing different types of external control is provided to highlight the variety of approaches used by sponsors and the challenges encountered in supporting product development and FDA decision making; particularly, the value and use of retrospective natural history in the development of products for rare diseases. Education on the use of external controls based on FDA regulatory precedent will allow for continued use and broader application of innovative approaches to clinical trial design, while avoiding delays in product development for rare diseases. Learnings from this review also highlight the need to update regulatory guidance to acknowledge the utility of external controls, particularly retrospective natural history data.

Building External Control Arms From Patient-Level Electronic Health Record Data to Replicate the Randomized IMblaze370 Control Arm in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

External control (EC) arms derived from electronic health records (EHRs) can provide appropriate comparison groups when randomized control arms are not feasible, but have not been explored for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) trials. We constructed EC arms from two patient-level EHR-derived databases and evaluated them against the control arm from a phase III, randomized controlled mCRC trial.

A mixed-method feasibility study of a novel transitional regime of incremental haemodialysis: study design and protocol

Background

Incremental haemodialysis/haemodiafiltration (HD) may help reduce early mortality rates in patients starting HD. This mixed-method feasibility study aims to test the acceptability, tolerance and safety of a novel incremental HD regime, and to study its impact on parameters of patient wellbeing.

Method

We aim to enrol 20 patients who will commence HD twice-weekly with progressive increases in duration and frequency, achieving conventional treatment times over 15 weeks (incremental group). Participants will be followed-up for 6 months and will undergo regular tests including urine collections, bio-impedance analyses and quality-of-life questionnaires. Semi-structured interviews will be conducted to explore patients’ prior expectations from HD, their motivations for participation and experiences of receiving incremental HD. For comparison of safety and indicators of dialysis adequacy, a cohort of 40 matched patients who previously received conventional HD will be constructed from local dialysis records (historical controls).

Results

Data will be recorded on the numbers screened and proportions consented and completing the study (primary outcome). Incremental and conventional groups will be compared in terms of differences in blood pressure control, interdialytic weight changes, indicators of dialysis adequacy and differences in adverse and serious adverse events. In analyses restricted to incremental group, measurements of RRF, fluid load and quality-of-life during follow-up will be compared with baseline values. From patient interviews, a narrative description of key themes along with anonymised quotes will be presented.

Conclusion

Results from this study will address a significant knowledge gap in the prescription HD therapy and inform the development novel future therapy regimens.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10157-021-02072-1.