- Browse by Subject
Browsing by Subject "Clinical trial design"
Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Design and Rationale of the Global Phase 3 NEURO-TTRansform Study of Antisense Oligonucleotide AKCEA-TTR-LRx (ION-682884-CS3) in Hereditary Transthyretin-Mediated Amyloid Polyneuropathy(SpringerLink, 2021-06) Coelho, Teresa; Ando, Yukio; Benson, Merrill D.; Berk, John L.; Waddington-Cruz, Márcia; Dyck, Peter J.; Gillmore, Julian D.; Khella, Sami L.; Litchy, William J.; Obici, Laura; Monteiro, Cecilia; Tai, Li-Jung; Viney, Nicholas J.; Buchele, Gustavo; Brambatti, Michela; Jung, Shiangtung W.; O’Dea, Louis St. L.; Tsimikas, Sotirios; Schneider, Eugene; Geary, Richard S.; Monia, Brett P.; Gertz, Morie; Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, School of MedicineIntroduction: AKCEA-TTR-LRx is a ligand-conjugated antisense (LICA) drug in development for the treatment of hereditary transthyretin amyloidosis (hATTR), a fatal disease caused by mutations in the transthyretin (TTR) gene. AKCEA-TTR-LRx shares the same nucleotide sequence as inotersen, an antisense medicine approved for use in hATTR polyneuropathy (hATTR-PN). Unlike inotersen, AKCEA-TTR-LRx is conjugated to a triantennary N-acetylgalactosamine moiety that supports receptor-mediated uptake by hepatocytes, the primary source of circulating TTR. This advanced design increases drug potency to allow for lower and less frequent dosing. The NEURO-TTRansform study will investigate whether AKCEA-TTR-LRx is safe and efficacious, with the aim of improving neurologic function and quality of life in hATTR-PN patients. Methods/design: Approximately 140 adults with stage 1 (independent ambulation) or 2 (requires ambulatory support) hATTR-PN are anticipated to enroll in this multicenter, open-label, randomized, phase 3 study. Patients will be assigned 6:1 to AKCEA-TTR-LRx 45 mg subcutaneously every 4 weeks or inotersen 300 mg once weekly until the prespecified week 35 interim efficacy analysis, after which patients receiving inotersen will receive AKCEA-TTR-LRx 45 mg subcutaneously every 4 weeks. All patients will then receive AKCEA-TTR-LRx through the remainder of the study treatment period. The final efficacy analysis at week 66 will compare the AKCEA-TTR-LRx arm with the historical placebo arm from the phase 3 trial of inotersen (NEURO-TTR). The primary outcome measures are between-group differences in the change from baseline in serum TTR, modified Neuropathy Impairment Score + 7, and Norfolk Quality of Life-Diabetic Neuropathy questionnaire. Conclusion: NEURO-TTRansform is designed to determine whether targeted delivery of AKCEA-TTR-LRx to hepatocytes with lower and less frequent doses will translate into clinical and quality-of-life benefits for patients with hATTR-PN.Item Developing Effective Alzheimer's Disease Therapies: Clinical Experience and Future Directions(IOS Press, 2019) Elmaleh, David R.; Farlow, Martin R.; Conti, Peter S.; Tompkins, Ronald G.; Kundakovic, Ljiljana; Tanzi, Rudolph E.; Neurology, School of MedicineAlzheimer's disease (AD) clinical trials, focused on disease modifying drugs and conducted in patients with mild to moderate AD, as well as prodromal (early) AD, have failed to reach efficacy endpoints in improving cognitive function in most cases to date or have been terminated due to adverse events. Drugs that have reached clinical stage were reviewed using web resources (such as clinicaltrials.gov, alzforum.org, company press releases, and peer reviewed literature) to identify late stage (Phase II and Phase III) efficacy clinical trials and summarize reasons for their failure. For each drug, only the latest clinical trials and ongoing trials that aimed at improving cognitive function were included in the analysis. Here we highlight the potential reasons that have hindered clinical success, including clinical trial design and choice of outcome measures, heterogeneity of patient populations, difficulties in diagnosing and staging the disease, drug design, mechanism of action, and toxicity related to the long-term use. We review and suggest approaches for AD clinical trial design aimed at improving our ability to identify novel therapies for this devastating disease.Item On the Use of Marker Strategy Design to Detect Predictive Marker Effect in Cancer Immunotherapy(2019-06) Han, Yan; Cao, Sha; Zhang, Ying; Zhang, Chi; Bakoyannis, GiorgosThe marker strategy design (MSGD) has been proposed to assess and validate predictive markers for targeted therapies and immunotherapies. Under this design, patients are randomized into two strategies: the marker-based strategy, which treats patients based on their marker status, and the non-marker-based strategy, which randomizes patients into treatments independent of their marker status in the same way as in a standard randomized clinical trial. The strategy effect is then tested by comparing the response rate between the two strategies and this strategy effect is commonly used to evaluate the predictive capability of the markers. We show that this commonly used between-strategy test is flawed, which may cause investigators to miss the opportunity to discover important predictive markers or falsely claim an irrelevant marker as predictive. Then we propose new procedures to improve the power of the MSGD to detect the predictive marker effect. One is based on a binary response endpoint; the second is based on survival endpoints. We conduct simulation studies to compare the performance of the MSGD with the widely used marker stratified design (MSFD). Numerical studies show that the MSGD and MSFD has comparable performance. Hence, contrary to popular belief that the MSGD is an inferior design compared with the MSFD, we conclude that using the MSGD with the proposed tests is an efficient and ethical way to find predictive markers for targeted therapies.