Defining responders to therapies by a statistical modeling approach applied to randomized clinical trial data

被引:11
作者
Bovis, Francesca [1 ]
Carmisciano, Luca [1 ]
Signori, Alessio [1 ]
Pardini, Matteo [2 ,3 ]
Steinerman, Joshua R. [4 ]
Li, Thomas [4 ]
Tansy, Aaron P. [4 ]
Sormani, Maria Pia [1 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Genoa, Dept Hlth Sci DISSAL, Via Pastore 1, I-16132 Genoa, Italy
[2] Univ Genoa, Dept Neurosci Rehabil Ophthalmol Genet Maternal &, Genoa, Italy
[3] IRCCS Osped Policlin San Martino, Genoa, Italy
[4] Teva Pharmaceut, Malvern, PA USA
关键词
Multiple sclerosis; Personalized treatment effects; Personalized medicine; Clinical trials; MULTIPLE-SCLEROSIS; EVALUATING MARKERS; ORAL LAQUINIMOD;
D O I
10.1186/s12916-019-1345-2
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
BackgroundPersonalized medicine is the tailoring of treatment to the individual characteristics of patients. Once a treatment has been tested in a clinical trial and its effect overall quantified, it would be of great value to be able to use the baseline patients' characteristics to identify patients with larger/lower benefits from treatment, for a more personalized approach to therapy.MethodsWe show here a previously published statistical method, aimed at identifying patients' profiles associated to larger treatment benefits applied to three identical randomized clinical trials in multiple sclerosis, testing laquinimod vs placebo (ALLEGRO, BRAVO, and CONCERTO). We identified on the ALLEGRO patients' specific linear combinations of baseline variables, predicting heterogeneous response to treatment on disability progression. We choose the best score on the BRAVO, based on its ability to identify responders to treatment in this dataset. We finally got an external validation on the CONCERTO, testing on this new dataset the performance of the score in defining responders and non-responders.ResultsThe best response score defined on the ALLEGRO and the BRAVO was a linear combination of age, sex, previous relapses, brain volume, and MRI lesion activity. Splitting patients into responders and non-responders according to the score distribution, in the ALLEGRO, the hazard ratio (HR) for disability progression of laquinimod vs placebo was 0.38 for responders, HR=1.31 for non-responders (interaction p=0.0007). In the BRAVO, we had similar results: HR=0.40 for responders and HR=1.24 for non-responders (interaction p=0.006). These findings were successfully replicated in the CONCERTO study, with HR=0.44 for responders and HR=1.08 for non-responders (interaction p=0.033).ConclusionsThis study demonstrates the possibility to refine and personalize the treatment effect estimated in randomized studies by using the baseline demographic and clinical characteristics of the included patients. The method can be applied to any randomized trial in any medical condition to create a treatment-specific score associated to different levels of response to the treatment tested in the trial. This is an easy and affordable method toward therapy personalization, indicating patient profiles related to a larger benefit from a specific drug, which may have implications for taking clinical decisions in everyday clinical practice.
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 28 条
  • [1] Defining responders to therapies by a statistical modeling approach applied to randomized clinical trial data
    Francesca Bovis
    Luca Carmisciano
    Alessio Signori
    Matteo Pardini
    Joshua R. Steinerman
    Thomas Li
    Aaron P. Tansy
    Maria Pia Sormani
    BMC Medicine, 17
  • [2] Review of multivariate techniques as applied to clinical trial data
    Patwardhan, RN
    AMERICAN STATISTICAL ASSOCIATION - 1996 PROCEEDINGS OF THE BIOPHARMACEUTICAL SECTION, 1996, : 82 - 86
  • [3] Phase IV study of retention on fingolimod versus injectable multiple sclerosis therapies: a randomized clinical trial
    Cree, Bruce A. C.
    Arnold, Douglas L.
    Cascione, Mark
    Fox, Edward J.
    Williams, Ian M.
    Meng, Xiangyi
    Schofield, Lesley
    Tenenbaum, Nadia
    THERAPEUTIC ADVANCES IN NEUROLOGICAL DISORDERS, 2018, 11
  • [4] Beyond the randomized clinical trial - The role of effectiveness studies in evaluating cardiovascular therapies
    Nallamothu, Brahmajee K.
    Hayward, Rodney A.
    Bates, Eric R.
    CIRCULATION, 2008, 118 (12) : 1294 - 1303
  • [5] An extensible and unifying approach to retrospective clinical data modeling: the BrainTeaser Ontology
    Faggioli, Guglielmo
    Menotti, Laura
    Marchesin, Stefano
    Chio, Adriano
    Dagliati, Arianna
    de Carvalho, Mamede
    Gromicho, Marta
    Manera, Umberto
    Tavazzi, Eleonora
    Di Nunzio, Giorgio Maria
    Silvello, Gianmaria
    Ferro, Nicola
    JOURNAL OF BIOMEDICAL SEMANTICS, 2024, 15 (01):
  • [6] Statistical efficiency of patient data in randomized clinical trials of epilepsy treatments
    Romero, Juan
    Goldenholz, Daniel M.
    EPILEPSIA, 2020, 61 (08) : 1659 - 1667
  • [7] Analysis of randomized comparative clinical trial data for personalized treatment selections
    Cai, Tianxi
    Tian, Lu
    Wong, Peggy H.
    Wei, L. J.
    BIOSTATISTICS, 2011, 12 (02) : 270 - 282
  • [8] Validation of the UVA Simulation Replay Methodology Using Clinical Data: Reproducing a Randomized Clinical Trial
    Villa-Tamayo, Maria F.
    Colmegna, Patricio
    Breton, Marc
    DIABETES TECHNOLOGY & THERAPEUTICS, 2024, 26 (10) : 720 - 727
  • [9] The MRC superficial bladder cancer trial of intravesical mytomicin-c after complete surgical resection. Sequential statistical methods applied to survival data from a randomised clinical trial
    Donaldson, Andres Michael
    Gonzalez, Juan Guillermo
    Parmar, Mahesh K. B.
    Donaldson, Nora
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2009, 7 (05) : 441 - 445
  • [10] Simple subgroup approximations to optimal treatment regimes from randomized clinical trial data
    Foster, Jared C.
    Taylor, Jeremy M. G.
    Kaciroti, Niko
    Nan, Bin
    BIOSTATISTICS, 2015, 16 (02) : 368 - 382