Clinical Trial Design for Heavily Treatment-Experienced Patients - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 15
About This Presentation
Title:

Clinical Trial Design for Heavily Treatment-Experienced Patients

Description:

Experience with at least one member of each class. Why this definition? ... broad patient population and has provided for flexibility in endpoint, however ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:47
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 16
Provided by: cde43
Learn more at: http://www.fda.gov
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Clinical Trial Design for Heavily Treatment-Experienced Patients


1
Clinical Trial Design for Heavily
Treatment-Experienced Patients
  • Meeting of the Antiviral Drugs Advisory Committee
  • January 11, 2001

2
Introduction
  • Statement of the issues
  • Meeting objectives
  • Defining the patient population
  • How we reached this point
  • Where we need to go
  • FDAs role focus
  • Public comment
  • Agenda
  • Acknowledgements

3
Issues
  • Utility of initial regimens is time-limited.
  • Insufficient treatment options for heavily
    treatment-experienced patients.
  • Very few antiretroviral labels have information
    on dosing, safety or efficacy in
    treatment-experienced patients.
  • Development of new agents and labeling is a
    public health priority.

4
Todays Objectives
  • Facilitate and promote development of new
    therapies for patients most in need of treatment
    options
  • Foster collaboration between companies
  • Obtain recommendations for incorporation into
    Guidances (HIV RNA, Resistance Testing and
    Alternative Dosing)

5
Defining the Heavily Treatment-Experienced
Population
  • For purpose of discussion
  • Loss or lack of virologic response to at least 2
    HAART regimens
  • Experience with at least one member of each class
  • Why this definition?
  • Designing comparative trials is problematic

6
How We Reached This Point
  • Historically, FDA has recommended that ARVs be
    studied in broad patient population and has
    provided for flexibility in endpoint, however ...
  • Registrational studies largely conducted in naïve
    or NRTI-experienced population
  • Evolving treatment since trial initiation
  • New drug may not be expected to be effective due
    to cross-resistance
  • Challenges of trial design and data
    interpretation in experienced population

7
Trial Design Challenges
  • Heterogeneity of population
  • Identification of acceptable comparators
  • Defining endpoint that is clinically-relevant and
    achievable
  • Consideration for additional dose finding
  • Complicated safety assessments

8
Where We Need to Go
  • Development of new agents with acceptable
    tolerability and established efficacy in
    experienced patients.
  • Development of novel clinical trial design
    approaches

9
FDAs Role
  • Ongoing discussions with Community and Industry
  • 1999 letter to Sponsors re use of gt1
    investigational agent
  • Labeling and other regulatory incentives
  • Accelerated approval, priority review
  • Consensus about need for FDA-sponsored working
    meeting on this topic

10
FDAs Focus
  • Registrational vs strategy trials
  • Registrational adequate and well-controlled,
    pivotal trials
  • Strategy exploratory studies to assess efficacy
    of a regimen
  • Distinction difference in ability to evaluate
    contribution of a given drug
  • Also interested in other trials that will provide
    prescribing information for labeling

11
Request for Public Input October 2000 Letter and
FRN
  • Proposals for trial design role of specific
    designs
  • Comments on patient population stratification
  • Appropriate control arms role of resistance
    testing
  • Outcome measures
  • Pediatric considerations

12
Morning AgendaTrial Design Issues
  • Therapeutic Challenges - A Clinical Perspective
    Douglas Ward
  • Trial Design Options for Adults Martin Schechter
  • Trial Design Options for Pediatrics
    Coleen Cunningham
  • Trial Design Options from a Patient Perspective
    Carlton Hogan
  • Summary of Public Responses and Regulatory
    Perspective Katherine Laessig
  • Questions and Discussion

13
Afternoon AgendaEndpoint Issues
  • Open Public Hearing
  • Continued Discussion of Morning Questions
  • Response Rates in Heavily Pretreated Patients
    Roy Gulick
  • Statistical Considerations for Endpoints
    Victor DeGruttola
  • Questions and Discussion

14
Acknowledgements for Responses
  • Community groups
  • Industry
  • Abbott Laboratories
  • Agouron Pharmaceuticals
  • Bristol Myers Squibb
  • DuPont Pharmaceuticals Company
  • Gilead Sciences
  • Glaxo Wellcome, Inc.
  • Hoffman-La Roche, Inc.
  • Merck Co., Inc.
  • Triangle Pharmaceuticals
  • Trimeris

15
Therapy for Treatment-Experienced Patients
Working Group
  • Debra Birnkrant
  • Therese Cvetkovich
  • Tom Hammerstrom
  • Harry Haverkos
  • Richard Klein
  • Stanka Kukich
  • Katherine Laessig
  • Jeffrey Murray
  • Greg Soon
  • Kimberly Struble
  • Joseph Toerner
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com