eugm 2011 | day | experiences with interim analyses and dm cs

34
Experiences with Interim Analyses and Data Monitoring Commi:ees EAST User‐Group MeeAng 14 th October 2011, Paris Simon Day, PhD

Upload: cytel-usa

Post on 11-Aug-2015

7 views

Category:

Health & Medicine


3 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: EUGM 2011 | DAY | Experiences with interim analyses and dm cs

ExperienceswithInterimAnalysesandDataMonitoringCommi:ees

EASTUser‐GroupMeeAng14thOctober2011,Paris

SimonDay,PhD

Page 2: EUGM 2011 | DAY | Experiences with interim analyses and dm cs

ExperienceswithInterimAnalysesandDataMonitoringCommi:ees

Or: I’d never be so stupid as to do that, would I?

Page 3: EUGM 2011 | DAY | Experiences with interim analyses and dm cs

3

“plansordecisionsbasedonstaAsAcallyimpreciseinterimdatamayoKenbesubopAmal”

Section 6.5 “Sponsor access to interim data for planning purposes”

Page 4: EUGM 2011 | DAY | Experiences with interim analyses and dm cs

4

Example–Afacogininseveresepsis

Page 5: EUGM 2011 | DAY | Experiences with interim analyses and dm cs

5

DesignandobjecAves

•  Doubleblind,placebo‐controlled,mulAcentre,phase3randomisedcontrolledclinicaltrial

•  Primaryoutcome–allcause28daymortality

•  Targetsamplesize1550(Increasedby400ataninterimanalysis)

Page 6: EUGM 2011 | DAY | Experiences with interim analyses and dm cs

6

Interimanalysis,N=722

•  Mortalityrates:placebo 38.9%Afacogin 29.1%

P=?

Page 7: EUGM 2011 | DAY | Experiences with interim analyses and dm cs

7

Interimanalysis,N=722

•  Mortalityrates:placebo 38.9%Afacogin 29.1%

P=0.

Page 8: EUGM 2011 | DAY | Experiences with interim analyses and dm cs

8

Interimanalysis,N=722

•  Mortalityrates:placebo 38.9%Afacogin 29.1%

P=0.006

Page 9: EUGM 2011 | DAY | Experiences with interim analyses and dm cs

9

Interimanalysis,N=722

•  Mortalityrates:placebo 38.9%Afacogin 29.1%

P=0.006

•  “Tifacoginsignificantlya:enuatedprothrombinfragmentandthrombin:anA‐thrombincomplexlevels[secondaryendpoints]inpaAentswithhighandlowINR[pre‐specifiedsubgroups]”

Page 10: EUGM 2011 | DAY | Experiences with interim analyses and dm cs

10

Whatshouldhappen?

•  Pre‐specifiedinterimanalysisat¼,½and¾ofpaAentscompleAng28days

•  Purpose:“safety,fuAlityandefficacy”

•  Safetyandefficacy–kindofthesamething

•  TifacoginiseffecAve–morepaAentsaredyingonplacebo

Page 11: EUGM 2011 | DAY | Experiences with interim analyses and dm cs

11

Whatshouldhappen?

•  Ifthistrialcon.nues,pa.entsrandomisedtothecontrolarmwillneedlesslydie

•  Another1100paAentsduetoberandomised

•  Weshouldorder160coffinsforpaAentswhowillbegiven.facogin

•  Weshouldorder215coffinsforpaAentswhowillbegivenplacebo

Page 12: EUGM 2011 | DAY | Experiences with interim analyses and dm cs

12

“Phew, I got the real stuff!”

Page 13: EUGM 2011 | DAY | Experiences with interim analyses and dm cs

13

Example–MRCacutemyeloidleukemia

The MRC AML12 trial

Page 14: EUGM 2011 | DAY | Experiences with interim analyses and dm cs

14

Thetrial

•  5coursesoftherapyversus4courses•  Primaryendpoint–survival•  1078paAents•  Yearlyinterimanalyses

Page 15: EUGM 2011 | DAY | Experiences with interim analyses and dm cs

15

Interimanalysis(2)

•  HazardraAo0.47(infavourof5courses)•  95%confidenceinterval0.29–0.77,P=0.003

Page 16: EUGM 2011 | DAY | Experiences with interim analyses and dm cs

16

Interimanalysis(3)

•  HazardraAo0.47(infavourof5courses)•  95%confidenceinterval0.29–0.77,P=0.003

•  HazardraAo0.55(infavourof5courses)•  95%confidenceinterval0.38–0.80,P=0.002

Page 17: EUGM 2011 | DAY | Experiences with interim analyses and dm cs

17

“That’ll be five courses for me,

please, waiter”

Page 18: EUGM 2011 | DAY | Experiences with interim analyses and dm cs

18

Lancet 2001; 357:1385–90.

Example–theCAPRICORNstudy

Page 19: EUGM 2011 | DAY | Experiences with interim analyses and dm cs

19

Primaryendpoint

Page 20: EUGM 2011 | DAY | Experiences with interim analyses and dm cs

20

New(changed)endpoint

•  All‐causemortality

•  Ataninterimanalysis,changedto:– All‐causemortality (P<0.005)Or– All‐causemortalityorcardiovascularhospitalisaAon

(P<0.045)

Page 21: EUGM 2011 | DAY | Experiences with interim analyses and dm cs

21

Results

Relative risk 0.77 (0.60 – 0.98) P=0.031

Relative risk 0.92 (0.80 – 1.07) P=0.296

All-cause mortality All-cause mortality or Cardiovascular hospitalisation

Page 22: EUGM 2011 | DAY | Experiences with interim analyses and dm cs

22

Results

Page 23: EUGM 2011 | DAY | Experiences with interim analyses and dm cs

23

Example–Afacogininseveresepsis

Page 24: EUGM 2011 | DAY | Experiences with interim analyses and dm cs

24

Interimanalysis,N=722

•  Mortalityrates:placebo 38.9%Afacogin 29.1%

P=0.006

•  “Tifacoginsignificantlya:enuatedprothrombinfragmentandthrombin:anA‐thrombincomplexlevels[secondaryendpoints]inpaAentswithhighandlowINR[pre‐specifiedsubgroups]”

Page 25: EUGM 2011 | DAY | Experiences with interim analyses and dm cs

25

Whatdidhappen?

•  Theykeptthetrialgoing(Yes,andpeopledied!)

•  Howmanydied? HighINR LowINRplacebo 296(33.9%) 118(23%)Afacogin 301(34.2%) 83(12%) P=0.?

Page 26: EUGM 2011 | DAY | Experiences with interim analyses and dm cs

26

Whatdidhappen?

•  Theykeptthetrialgoing(Yes,andpeopledied!)

•  Howmanydied? HighINR LowINRplacebo 296(33.9%) 118(23%)Afacogin 301(34.2%) 83(12%) P=0.051 Pearsonχ2

Page 27: EUGM 2011 | DAY | Experiences with interim analyses and dm cs

27

Whatdidhappen?

•  Theykeptthetrialgoing(Yes,andpeopledied!)

•  Howmanydied? HighINR LowINRplacebo 296(33.9%) 118(23%)Afacogin 301(34.2%) 83(12%) P=0.03 logisAcregression

Page 28: EUGM 2011 | DAY | Experiences with interim analyses and dm cs

28

Conclusion

“plans or decisions based on statistically imprecise interim data may often be suboptimal”

Page 29: EUGM 2011 | DAY | Experiences with interim analyses and dm cs

29

Example–MRCacutemyeloidleukemia

The MRC AML12 trial

Page 30: EUGM 2011 | DAY | Experiences with interim analyses and dm cs

30

Interimanalysis(3)

•  HazardraAo0.47(infavourof5courses)•  95%confidenceinterval0.29–0.77,P=0.003

•  HazardraAo0.55(infavourof5courses)•  95%confidenceinterval0.38–0.80,P=0.002

Page 31: EUGM 2011 | DAY | Experiences with interim analyses and dm cs

31

Whatshouldhappen?

•  Again,theDMEC(sic)keptthetrialgoing,despiteendpointbeingdeath

•  Fromthepaper:“ThemainreasonfornotclosingtherandomisaAonwasthatthetreatmenteffects(53%and45%reducAoninoddsofdeath)wereconsideredtoolargetobeclinicallyplausible.”

•  TheywereBayesians!

Page 32: EUGM 2011 | DAY | Experiences with interim analyses and dm cs

32

Thesequenceofevents

“plans or decisions based on statistically imprecise interim data may often be suboptimal”

Page 33: EUGM 2011 | DAY | Experiences with interim analyses and dm cs

33

SothequesAonstoaskyourselves

1.  “Thattrialwestoppedearly…whatwouldhavehappenedifwehadkeptgoing?”

2.  “Thatfixedsamplesizetrialthatwedid…whatwouldhavehappenedifitrecruitedmorepaAents?”

Page 34: EUGM 2011 | DAY | Experiences with interim analyses and dm cs

ExperienceswithInterimAnalysesandDataMonitoringCommi:ees