Adaptive Enrichment Designs for Stroke Clinical Trials

SUMMARY Background Craniotomy, when evaluated in trials, does not improve outcome after intracerebral haemorrhage (ICH). Whether minimally invasive catheter evacuation followed by thrombolysis is safe and can achieve a good functional outcome by removing clot is unknown. We investigated safety and efficacy of alteplase with minimally invasive surgery (MIS) in patients with intracerebral haemorrhage. Methods MISTIE was an international, randomized, open-label study and was done in 26 hospitals in the USA, Canada, the UK, and Germany. Patients (aged 18–80 years), with non-traumatic (spontaneous) ICH ≥20 mL were randomly allocated, centrally, to medical care or image-guided MIS plus rt-PA (0.3 mg or 1.0 mg every 8 hours for up to 9 doses) to remove clot using surgical aspiration followed with alteplase clot irrigation. The primary efficacy outcome was the adjusted dichotomized modified Rankin Scale (mRS) 0–3 vs 4–6 assessed at day 180 after symptom onset. Analysis was by intention to treat. (ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT00224770). Findings Between February 2, 2006 and April 8, 2013, 96 subjects were randomized and completed follow-up: 54 received treatment and 42 medical care. Primary safety outcomes: mortality, symptomatic bleeding, brain infections, as well as withdrawal of care, did not differ between groups. Asymptomatic hemorrhages were more common in the surgical group (3 (7%) vs. 12 (22%) p= 0.05) producing a difference of 15.1% (95% CI: 1.5% to 28.6%). The estimated absolute benefit, i.e., the unadjusted difference in observed proportions of all subjects with mRS 0–3 (33% vs 21%) at 180 days comparing MISPA vs. medical control, is 0.109 [95%CI: −0.088, 0.294; p=0.26], and is 0.162 [95%CI: 0.003, 0.323; p=0.05] after adjustment for potential imbalances in baseline severity between study arms (primary efficacy outcome). Interpretation MIS+rt-PA appears safe with an apparent advantage of better functional outcome at 180 days. Increased asymptomatic bleeding is a major cautionary finding. The MISTIE trial results, if replicable, could produce a meaningful functional benefit adding surgical management as a therapeutic strategy for ICH. Funding National Institute of Neurologic Disorders and Stroke, Genentech, and Codman.

A new generation of molecularly targeted agents is entering the definitive stage of clinical evaluation. Many of these drugs benefit only a subset of treated patients and may be overlooked by the traditional, broad-eligibility approach to randomized clinical trials. Thus, there is a need for development of novel statistical methodology for rapid evaluation of these agents. We propose a new adaptive design for randomized clinical trials of targeted agents in settings where an assay or signature that identifies sensitive patients is not available at the outset of the study. The design combines prospective development of a gene expression-based classifier to select sensitive patients with a properly powered test for overall effect. Performance of the adaptive design, relative to the more traditional design, is evaluated in a simulation study. It is shown that when the proportion of patients sensitive to the new drug is low, the adaptive design substantially reduces the chance of false rejection of effective new treatments. When the new treatment is broadly effective, the adaptive design has power to detect the overall effect similar to the traditional design. Formulas are provided to determine the situations in which the new design is advantageous. Development of a gene expression-based classifier to identify the subset of sensitive patients can be prospectively incorporated into a randomized phase III design without compromising the ability to detect an overall effect.

Suppose that under the conventional randomized clinical trial setting, a new therapy is compared with a standard treatment. In this article, we propose a systematic, 2-stage estimation procedure for the subject-level treatment differences for future patient's disease management and treatment selections. To construct this procedure, we first utilize a parametric or semiparametric method to estimate individual-level treatment differences, and use these estimates to create an index scoring system for grouping patients. We then consistently estimate the average treatment difference for each subgroup of subjects via a nonparametric function estimation method. Furthermore, pointwise and simultaneous interval estimates are constructed to make inferences about such subgroup-specific treatment differences. The new proposal is illustrated with the data from a clinical trial for evaluating the efficacy and toxicity of a 3-drug combination versus a standard 2-drug combination for treating HIV-1-infected patients.