1 chapter 9 bridging studies & multi-regional trials
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
1
Chapter 9Chapter 9
Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional
TrialsTrials
![Page 2: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
2
Outline
Introduction
Taiwan’s Situations
An Bayesian Approach
Discussion
![Page 3: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
3
Introduction
ICH (International Conference on Harmonisation) E5
Ethnic Factors in the Acceptability of
Foreign Clinical Data
The purpose of this guidance is to facilitate the
registration of medicines among ICH regions
by recommending a framework for evaluating
the impact of ethnic factors upon a medicine’s
effect, i.e., its efficacy and safety at a particular
dosage and dose regimen.
![Page 4: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
4
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 150.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Asian (n = 342)HR = 0.66 (0.48, 0.91), P = .011
RR = 12.0%
Non-Asian (n = 1350)HR = 0.93 (0.81, 1.08), P = .364
RR = 6.5%
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.00 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
—— IRESSA®
------ Placebo
Time, mo
Pat
ien
ts s
urv
ivin
g (
%)
Ethnic Difference
![Page 5: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
5
Objectives of ICH E5
To describe the characteristics of foreign clinical data that will facilitate their extrapolation to different populations
and support their acceptance as a basis for registration of a medicine in a new region
To describe regulatory strategies that minimize duplication of clinical data and facilitate acceptance of foreign clinical data in the new region
To describe the use of bridging studies, when necessary, to allow extrapolation of foreign clinical data to a new region
To describe development strategies capable of characterizing ethnic factor influences on safety, efficacy, dosage, and dose regimen
![Page 6: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
6
Bridging Data PackageA bridging data package consists of
1) Selected information from the complete clinical data package (CCDP) that is relevant to the population of the new region, including pharmacokinetic data, and any preliminary pharmacodynamic and dose-response data,
and
2) If needed, a bridging study to extrapolate the foreign efficacy and/or safety data to the new region.
![Page 7: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
7
Complete Clinical Data Package
A clinical data package intended for
registration containing clinical data that fulfill the
regulatory requirements of the new region and
containing pharmacokinetic data relevant to the
population in the new region
![Page 8: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
8
Bridging StudyA bridging study is defined as a supplemental study
performed in the new region to provide
pharmacodynamic or clinical data on efficacy,
safety, dosage, and dose regimen in the new
region that will allow extrapolation of the
foreign clinical data to the new region.
![Page 9: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
9
Ethnic Factors Intrinsic Ethnic Factors are more genetic and
physiologic in nature
e.g., genetic polymorphism, age, gender, height, weight, lean body mass, body composition, and disease conditions, etc.
Extrinsic Ethnic Factors are more social and cultural in nature
e.g., environment, culture, medical practice, health insurance, practices in clinical trials or conduct
![Page 10: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
10
Bridging Studies
• ICH E5
• Only after the medicine is approved in
the original region
• Performed in the new region
![Page 11: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
11
Taiwan’s Situations
![Page 12: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
12
Taiwan Before Bridging Study An approved local clinical trial study report is
required for the new drug application in Taiwan—July 7 Announcement in 1993
Disadvantage: A sample size of 40 as required would be
difficult to demonstrate significant importance clinically or statistically
The study design of the local trial usually only repeated a study that has been done in the foreign
countries but in a smaller sample size;The study has not been designed based on the medical situation in Taiwan
![Page 13: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
13
Taiwan’s Strategy to Implement Bridging Study Smoothly convert compulsory Local Clinical Trial (LCT) to
meaningful bridging study Gradually, stepwise announce waived local clinical trial Create an environment: (1) meet international regulation, ICH (2) require optimized dosage for Taiwanese patient Communicate with local and international pharmaceutical
industry Announce new regulation according to the international
norm and the consensus from communications Create an international platform “APEC – Taipei” Implement Double Twelve Announcement – Bridging
Study
![Page 14: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
14
Stepwise Implementation 1998 Announce: two years later, switch from LCT to
bridging study Many communications and negotiations with local and
international pharmaceutical industry 2000, Dec.12, (Double Twelve Announcement) – public
announce bridging study regulation 1998 Five announcements of LCT wavier Two years transition periods: both LCT and bridging
studies acceptable from 2000 ~ 2002 Many international conferences held in Taipei and other
Asian countries, regarding BS, through the APEC platform Ask CDE to complete the practical issues related to
implementation of BS 2004, Jan. 1, Bridging evaluation
![Page 15: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
15
Available Statistical Methods 1. Hierarchical Model
(Liu, Hsueh, and Chen, 2002, Biometrical Journal, 44: 969-981) 2. Takeuchi, M. Controlled Clinical Trials 23: 55-57, 2002 3. Shao, J. and Chow, S. C. Statistics in Medicine, 21: 1727-1742, 2002 4. Population Similarity
(Chow, Shao, Hu, 2002, JBS, 12: 385-400) 5. Consistency Approach (Shih, 2001, Controlled Clinical Trials, 22: 357-366) 6. Bayesian Positive Treatment Approach
(Liu, Hsiao, and Hsueh, 2002, JBS 12: 297-294) 7. Bayesian Noninferiority Approach
(Liu, Hsueh and Hsiao, 2004, JBS accepted) 8. Group Sequential Approach
(Hsiao, Xu and Liu, 2003, JBS, 13: 793-801) 9. Two-Stage Approach (Hsiao, Xu and Liu, 2004, submitted)
![Page 16: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
16
INFO
Y3 N
Data Package
Vol., page1 Checking List for the evaluation of Bridging Study by the Sponsor
I. The current status of clinical study of the drug in the world □ □
II. NDA expert report or Investigator’s Brochure2 □ □
III. Pharmacokinetics, safety and efficacy data related to Asian population □ □
IV.Comparative analysis of Pharmacokinetics, safety and efficacy data between Asian population and others. □ □
V. Self evaluation (please provide reference materials or literature) □ □Y N U
1. Does the drug show a Non-linear pharmacokinetics at the therapeutic dose?
□ □□ □ □
2. Is the drug with a steep pharmacodynamic curve for both efficacy and safety (a small change in dose results in a large change in effect) in the range of the recommended dosage and dose regimen?
□ □□ □ □
□ □□ □ □3. Is the drug with narrow therapeutic dose range?
Note : 1. To speed up reviewing process, please clearly indicate the volume and page number as requested. In
addition to the page number, the related paragraph may be highlighted when necessary. 2. Please provide the comparative analysis of different ethnic groups, if it’s available. Please also explain
if there is no comparative analysis of different ethnic groups in NDA expert report. 3. Y=yes; N=no; U=unknown
Checking List for Sponsors (1 of 3)
![Page 17: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
17
Note : 1. To speed up reviewing process, please clearly indicate the volume and page number as requested. In
addition to the page number, the related paragraph may be highlighted when necessary.2. Y=yes; N=no; U=unknown
INFO
Y2 N
Data Package
Vol., page1 Checking List for the evaluation of Bridging Study by the Sponsor
V. Self evaluation (please provide reference materials or literature) □ □Y N U
4. Is the drug highly metabolized, especially through a single pathway, thereby increasing the potential for drug-drug interaction ?
□ □□ □ □
5. Is the drug metabolized by enzyme known to show genetic polymorphism?
□ □□ □ □
□ □□ □ □6. Is the drug administered as a prodrug, with the potential for ethnically variable enzymatic conversion ?
□ □□ □ □7. Is the drug with high inter-subject variation in bioavailability ?
□ □□ □ □8. Is the drug with low bioavailability, thus more susceptible to dietary absorption effects?
□ □□ □ □9. Is the drug with high likelihood of use in setting of multiple co-medications ?
□ □□ □ □10. Is the drug with high likelihood for inappropriate use, e.g. analgesics and tranquilizers ?
Checking List For Sponsors (2 of 3)
![Page 18: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
18
INFO
Y3 N
Data Package
Vol., page1 Checking List for the evaluation of Bridging Study by the Sponsor
V. Self evaluation (please provide reference materials or literature) □ □Y N U
11. Is there any difference in epidemics of applied indication between the major study population and our population (including medical history, mechanism of disease development and the rate of occurrence, the efficacy and safety of other drugs in the same class)?
□ □□ □ □
12. Other important ethnic sensitive factors, such as “Is there any difference in the medical practice?” □ □□ □ □
Note : 1. To speed up reviewing process, please clearly indicate the volume and page number as requested. In
addition to the page number, the related paragraph may be highlighted when necessary. 2. Y=yes; N=no; U=unknown3. Please according the checking list provide an integrate summary or a brief description of all the
information submitted.
VI. Post-marketing surveillance information □ □
Overall conclusion of self evaluation (Is it clinically insignificant? What is the risk and benefit of the drug applied (such as, “Does the indication applied belong to severe disease”, “Is there a alternative therapy?”, “Are the differences of the data in ethnic factors acceptable ?)
□ □
Summary3 □ □
Checking List for Sponsors (3 of 3)
![Page 19: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
19
•Bridging Data Package•Summary for the Consideration of Bridging Study
Accept submission
Checking ListTechnical Review
(Designate reviewer)
Review meeting
Sponsor meetingSupplement
Clinical Review Committee
Review report and Recommendation:1. No Bridging study required2. Bridging study is required – Type of Bridging study
Result of Evaluation:1. No Bridging study
required2. Bridging study is required
– Type of Bridging studyNotification
Sponsor BoPA CDE
CDE acceptance
verification
Expert Consultants (Statistical, Clinical, Pharmacokinetics reviewers)
Schedule Sponsor meeting
![Page 20: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
20
![Page 21: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
21
71.1
21.1 21.1 21.1
47.455.3
5.3
31.6
2.6
0
20
40
60
80
100R
easo
ns f
or n
ot w
aive
d/to
tal c
ases
(%
)
![Page 22: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
22
Does bridging strategy of ICH E5 warrant further implementation?
Is Taiwan on the right way?
![Page 23: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
23
Case I
Drug A is a fixed combination of two anti-platelet agents with indication for secondary prevention of thromboembolic stroke (200mg dipyridamole/25mg aspirin 1bid)
After the standard process of BSE, we decided to request a bridging study due to an ethnic difference in medical practice (much lower dose for one of the components in Taiwan) and higher headache-associated dropout rate in previous Philippine study
![Page 24: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
24
Case I
Headache drop out rate: Phillipino > Caucasian Local Bridging Study Result : first 4 weeks
Group Placebo Reduced Dose 2wk Full Dose Full Dose 2wk 4wk
Headache 8.7% 6.7% 16.3%drop out rate
Risk Management: Change labeling’s instruction for use
![Page 25: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
25
Case II
Drug B is a new potent lipid-lowering agent The PK study in Japanese shows that Cmax
of Japanese is 1.9~2.5 times of that for Caucasian while AUC is 2~2.5 times
Although the mean interracial difference is not substantial, Taiwan approved the drug with reduced maximal dosage due to the dose-dependent, drug-related rare SAE of rhabdomyolysis
![Page 26: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
26
Case II
The decision is further echoed by US FDA After reviewing the results of a Phase IV
PK study in Asian-Americans, FDA urged the physician to reduce the starting dose and prescribe high dose with caution for Asians in Labeling in March, 2005
![Page 27: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
27
Bayesian Approach
![Page 28: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
28
Bayesian ApproachFor bridging studies Small sample size No power Information on dose response, efficacy and safety of the
original region can not be concurrently obtained from the local bridging studies but are available in the trials conducted in the original region
Need to borrow “strength” from CCDP of the original region
Information on dose response, efficacy and safety of the original region can and should be incorporated in a statistically sound manner to evaluate bridging evidence by local bridging studies
![Page 29: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
29
Before Experiment
After Experiment
Bayesian Approach
Past experience about similar situations
involving similar
Prior informationP (
Posterior information
P(prior&data
Observed results( Data )
MakeStatisticalinference
Treatmenteffect
![Page 30: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
30
Assumption, Notation and Hypotheses We focus on the trials for comparing a test product
and a placebo control Xi and Yj are some efficacy responses for patients i
and j receiving the test product and the placebo control respectively in the new region
Xi’s and Yj’s are normally distributed with known variance σ2
μNT and μNP are the population means of the test and placebo, respectively, and let ΔN = μNT - μNP
H0: ΔN 0 vs. HA: ΔN > 0
![Page 31: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
31
Parameters
Test Product Effect
Placebo Effect
Original Region OT OP
New Region NT NP
![Page 32: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
32
Before Bridging Study
Original region data to estimate OT
Original region data to estimate OP
ConcludeOT > OP
![Page 33: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
33
Bayesian Positive Treatment Approach
Original region information to
form prior
Posterior information
P{NT-NP prior & bridging
Bridging data
New regiontreatment effect
NT — NP
Conclude NT>NP if
P{NT-NP>0 prior & bridging
is large
![Page 34: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
34
Previous Statistical Approach
Use the estimate of treatment effect from the original region formulated as a normal prior
Compute the posterior treatment effect with the data from the new region
![Page 35: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
35
Results from Original RegionChange from baseline in sitting DBP at week 12Region Statistics Test PlaceboI n 138 132
Mean -18 -3 SD 11 12
II n 185 179 Mean -17 -2
SD 10 11III n 141 143
Mean -15 -5 SD 13 14
Previous Statistical Approach
![Page 36: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
36
Results from New Region:
Change from baseline in Sitting DBP at week 12
Region Statistics Test PlaceboNew n 64 65
Mean -4.5 -3.8 SD 11 11
Posterior probability of similarity: Psp 1
Previous Statistical Approach
![Page 37: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
37
Previous Statistical Approach
Original region: Efficacy of the test drug is superior to the placebo
New Region: Reduction of sitting BP of the test drug is same as that of the placebo
Conclusion: The results of the original region can be extrapolated to the new region despite of inconsistent results between original and new regions
Evaluation of bridging studies is overwhelmingly by the results of original region due to imbalance of information provided by the two regions
![Page 38: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
38
Use of Prior Distribution
The proposed mixture model of the prior
distribution for ΔN is a weighted average of the noninformative and normal priors as given below
π(ΔN) =γπ1(ΔN) + (1-γ)π2(ΔN) π1(.) ≡c is a non-informative prior π2(.) is a normal prior with mean θ0 and variance σ
02 which summarizes the foreign clinical data abou
t the treatment difference provided in the CCDP 0 γ 1≦ ≦
![Page 39: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
39
Marginal Density
Based on the clinical responses from the
bridging study in new region, ΔN can be
estimated by
The marginal density is
where
.ˆNNN yx
,)~(2
)ˆ(exp
)~(2
1)1()ˆ(
220
20N
220
N
m
.//~P
2T
22 nn
![Page 40: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
40
Posterior Distribution
Given the bridging data and prior distribution,
the posterior distribution of ΔN is
.~2
)ˆ(
2
)(exp~2
1)1(
~2
)ˆ(exp~2
1
)ˆ(
1)ˆ|(
2
2NN
20
20N
0
2
2NN
NN
m
![Page 41: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
41
Bridging EvaluationSimilarity on efficacy in terms of a positivetreatment effect for the new region can beconcluded if the posterior probability ofSimilarity
for some pre-specified 0 < < 0.5.
,1
)ˆ|(
)prior and data bridging|0(PP
0
NNN
NPNTSP
d
![Page 42: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
42
Example
The CCDP provides the results of three randomized, placebo controlled trials for a new antidepressant (test drug) conducted in the original region
The primary endpoint is the change from baseline of sitting diastolic blood pressure (mmHg) at week 12
A bridging study was conducted in the new region to compare the difference in efficacy between the new and original region
![Page 43: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
43
Three Scenarios The first scenario presents the situation where no
statistically significant difference in the primary endpoint exists between the test drug and placebo (2-sided p-value = 0.6430
The second situation is that the mean reduction of sitting diastolic blood pressure at week 12 of the test drug is statistically significantly greater than the placebo group (2-sided p-value < 0.0001)
The third scenario is the situation where due to the insufficient sample size of the bridging study, no statistical significance is found between the test drug and placebo although the magnitude of the difference between the test drug and placebo observed in the original region is preserved in the new region (2-sided p-value = 0.0716)
![Page 44: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/44.jpg)
44Treatment Group Region Statistics
Drug Placebo
Original 1 N
Mean
Standard Deviation
138
-18
11
132
-3
12
Original 2 N
Mean
Standard Deviation
185
-17
10
179
-2
11
Original 3 N
Mean
Standard Deviation
141
-15
13
143
-5
14
New 1
(Example 1)
N
Mean
Standard Deviation
64
-4.7
11
65
-3.8
11
New 2
(Example 2)
N
Mean
Standard Deviation
64
-15
11
65
-2
11
New 3
(Example 3)
N
Mean
Standard Deviation
24
-11
13
23
-4
13
![Page 45: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/45.jpg)
45
Psp Example 1 Example 2 Example 3
0.0 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 0.1 0.6789 0.9999 0.9727 0.2 0.6789 0.9999 0.9700 0.3 0.6789 0.9999 0.9690 0.4 0.6789 0.9999 0.9685 0.5 0.6789 0.9999 0.9682 0.6 0.6789 0.9999 0.9680 0.7 0.6789 0.9999 0.9678 0.8 0.6789 0.9999 0.9677 0.9 0.6789 0.9999 0.9676 1.0 0.6789 0.9999 0.9675
![Page 46: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/46.jpg)
46
Scenario I
If the regulatory agency allows all information of the original region to be used for evaluation of similarity between the new and original region, γ is set to be 0 and hence PSP 1.00
If γ 0.1, then P≧ SP always drops to around
0.6789
![Page 47: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/47.jpg)
47
Scenario II
The values of PSP in Example 2 appear to be
close to 1.00 regardless of the choice of γ
![Page 48: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/48.jpg)
48
Scenario III
• The values of PSP are all greater than 0.9675 for all
values of γ between 0 and 1 • With the strength of the substantial evidence of
efficacy is borrowed from the CCDP of the original region, our procedure can prove the similarity of efficacy between the new and original region when a non-significant efficacy result but with a similar magnitude is observed in the bridging study
![Page 49: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/49.jpg)
49
Final Remarks
The proposed prior is a weighted average of a non-informative prior and a normal prior
The proposed procedure can avoid the situation of concluding similarity between the new and original region when the efficacy result of the test drug observed the bridging study of the new region is same as or even worse than that of the placebo group
Our proposed procedure can reach a conclusion that is more consistent with the results obtained from the bridging study
![Page 50: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/50.jpg)
50
Final Remarks
Selection of weight γ by the regulatory agency in the new region should consider all differences in both intrinsic and extrinsic ethnical factors between the new and original regions and at the same time should also reflect their belief on the evidence of efficacy provided in the CCDP of the original region
![Page 51: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/51.jpg)
51
Final Remarks
We use a normal prior for summarization of the results in CCDP of the original region
We also use other prior distributions
I) double exponential distribution
II) lognormal distribution
Other different distributions used for π2
reach the same conclusion
![Page 52: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/52.jpg)
52
The 4th Multitrack Workshop in Japan
Pursuing Global Joint Development, Drug Discovery
and Fostering Promotion
![Page 53: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/53.jpg)
53
Drug Lag
Number of products waiting for marketing among world’s top 88 selling-products in 2004• Japan: 28• Russia: 27• Singapore: 22• Taiwan: 12• France: 9• Korea: 5• Germany: 2• UK: 1• USA:0
![Page 54: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/54.jpg)
54
![Page 55: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/55.jpg)
55
![Page 56: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/56.jpg)
56
ICH-E5 Q11
• It may be desirable in certain situations to achieve the goal of bridging by conducting a multi-regional trial under a common protocol that includes sufficient numbers of patients from each of multiple regions to reach a conclusion about the effect of the drug in all regions…
![Page 57: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/57.jpg)
57
Key Words in Q11 Answer
• Multiregional Trials serving as a bridging study• Hierarchy of persuasiveness
– The most persuasive results• Statistical significant in overall result AND• Statistical significant in region of interest
– Still persuasive results • Statistical significant in overall result AND• Region of interest could not reach statistical significance
BUT• Consistent trends across regions
![Page 58: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/58.jpg)
58
Questions
• How do we draw inferences concerning the treatment effect in a multi-regional trial?
• How do we assess “consistent trends” across regions?
• What is a rational way to determine the minimum sample size for a region?
![Page 59: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/59.jpg)
59
Fundamental Premises
1. No region should proclaim itself to be the region of interest and demand the treatment to show a statistically significant result at the usual significance level within that region.
2. The study’s primary objective is to demonstrate an overall treatment effect.
3. Satisfying regional requirement is a key secondary objective.
![Page 60: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/60.jpg)
60
Assumption and Notation
We focus on the trials for comparing a test product and a placebo control
Xi and Yj are some efficacy responses for patients i and j receiving the test product and the placebo control respectively in the new region
Xi’s and Yj’s are normally distributed with known variance σ2
μT and μP are the population means of the test product and placebo, respectively, and let Δ = μT - μP
![Page 61: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/61.jpg)
61
Assumption and Notation• Effect size (Δ/σ) is uniform across regions• Hypothesis: H0:Δ 0 vs. H≦ A:Δ > 0 • N is the total sample size for each group planned for detect
ing an expected treatment difference Δ=δ at the desired significance level αand with power 1 - β.
N=2{(z1-α+z1-β)/δ}2,
where z1-α is the (1 - α)th percentile of the standard normal distribution.
![Page 62: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/62.jpg)
62
Assumption and Notation
• pi is the proportion of patients in the ith region
• Zi is the test statistic in the ith region
• For simplicity, we will work with 3 regions
• Z is the test statistic for the overall results
![Page 63: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/63.jpg)
63
Strategies
• Positive consistent trends across all regions
• Positive consistent trends at some significant level for all regions
• Positive consistent trend for a specific region
![Page 64: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/64.jpg)
64
11 2
1
2
pp p
Notations
1 2 11 2p p p
Region 3[Largest]
Region 2[Second smallest]
Region 1 ( Japan? )
[Smallest]
Sample Size/Group: N
p3
p2
p1
The number N is determined to provide an 80% or 90% power for the primary analysis at the one-sided 2.5% level.
Due to the constraints ofp1 ≤ p2 ≤ p3 and p1+p2+p3=1
D3
D2
D1
Estimated treatment effect(New treatment - Placebo)
![Page 65: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/65.jpg)
65
Positive Consistent Trends Across All RegionsProbability of consistent trends across 3 regions
ψ(x) is the cumulative distribution of the standard
normal distribution at x
)0 ,0 ,0(
113
1
321
ZZp
ZZZP
P
jj
cs
![Page 66: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/66.jpg)
66
Observations
• Pcs is the largest when p1 = p2 = p3, i.e., the 3 regions are equally represented.
• For a given p1,
Pcs is the smallest when p2 = p1;
Pcs is the largest when p2 = p3 = (1-p1)/2.
![Page 67: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/67.jpg)
67
Pcs When p2 = p1
(p1, p2, p3) 80% power 90% power
(0.05, 0.05, 0.9) 53.7 58.6
(0.1, 0.1, 0.8) 65.6 71.7
(0.15, 0.15, 0.7) 73.4 79.9
(0.2, 0.2, 0.6) 78.9 85.3
(0.25, 0.25, 0.5) 82.5 88.8
(0.3, 0.3, 0.4) 84.5 90.7
![Page 68: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/68.jpg)
68
Pcs When p2 = p3
(p1, p2, p3) 80% power 90% power
(0.05, 0.475, 0.475) 69.6 74.6
(0.1, 0.45, 0.45) 76.4 82.2
(0.15, 0.425, 0.425) 80.4 86.5
(0.2, 0.4, 0.4) 82.8 88.9
(0.25, 0.375, 0.375) 84.2 90.3
(0.3, 0.35, 0.35) 84.8 91.0
![Page 69: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/69.jpg)
69
A Reasonable Question
• Assuming that treatment effect is positive and uniform across regions, what is the minimum number of subjects the smallest region should contribute so that the probability of observing consistent trends across the 3 regions is 80% (90%)?
![Page 70: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/70.jpg)
70
Plots of Pcs against p1 with p2=p1
p 1
Pro
babi
lity
of
obse
rvin
g al
l Di>
0
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30
0.8
0.9
0.151 0.213 0.277
Power:90%
Power:80%
Pcs neverreaches 90%
![Page 71: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/71.jpg)
71
But …
• In practice, inference concerning regional results in a confirmatory trial is relevant only if the overall treatment effect is statistically significant.
• The above calls for looking at Pcs conditional on first concluding a significant overall treatment effect at the one-sided 2.5% level.
![Page 72: 1 Chapter 9 Bridging Studies & Multi-Regional Trials](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062315/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bbde/html5/thumbnails/72.jpg)
72
Conditional Pcs vs Unconditional Pcs
80% power 90% power
(0.05, 0.05, 0.9) 57.5 (53.7) 64.6 (58.6)
(0.1, 0.1, 0.8) 71.1 (65.6) 73.8 (71.7)
(0.15, 0.15, 0.7) 82.5 (73.4) 82.5 (79.9)
(0.2, 0.2, 0.6) 86.1 (78.9) 90.0 (85.3)
(0.25, 0.25, 0.5) 90.9 (82.5) 92.2 (88.8)
(0.3, 0.3, 0.4) 93.2 (84.5) 94.4 (90.7)
Treatment effect = 0.250, =1