Pharmaceutical Statistics最新文献

In preclinical drug discovery, at the step of lead optimization of a compound, in vivo experimentation can differentiate several compounds in terms of efficacy and potency in a biological system of whole living organisms. For the lead optimization study, it may be desirable to implement a dose-response design so that compound comparisons can be made from nonlinear curves fitted to the data. A dose-response design requires more thought relative to a simpler study design, needing parameters for the number of doses, the dose values, and the sample size per dose. This tutorial illustrates how to calculate statistical power, choose doses, and determine sample size per dose for a comparison of two or more dose-response curves for a future in vivo study.

In covariate-adaptive or response-adaptive randomization, the treatment assignment and outcome can be correlated. Under this situation, the re-randomization test is a straightforward and attractive method to provide valid statistical inferences. In this paper, we investigate the number of repetitions in tests. This is motivated by a group sequential design in clinical trials, where the nominal significance bound can be very small at an interim analysis. Accordingly, re-randomization tests lead to a very large number of required repetitions, which may be computationally intractable. To reduce the number of repetitions, we propose an adaptive procedure and compare it with multiple approaches under predefined criteria. Monte Carlo simulations are conducted to show the performance of different approaches in a limited sample size. We also suggest strategies to reduce total computation time and provide practical guidance in preparing, executing, and reporting before and after data are unblinded at an interim analysis, so one can complete the computation within a reasonable time frame.

In vitro dissolution testing is a regulatory required critical quality measure for solid dose pharmaceutical drug products. Setting the acceptance criteria to meet compendial criteria is required for a product to be filed and approved for marketing. Statistical approaches for analyzing dissolution data, setting specifications and visualizing results could vary according to product requirements, company's practices, and scientific judgements. This paper provides a general description of the steps taken in the evaluation and setting of in vitro dissolution specifications at release and on stability.

This tutorial describes single-step low-dimensional simultaneous inference with a focus on the availability of adjusted p values and compatible confidence intervals for more than just the usual mean value comparisons. The basic idea is, first, to use the influence of correlation on the quantile of the multivariate t-distribution: the higher the less conservative. In addition, second, the estimability of the correlation matrix using the multiple marginal models approach (mmm) using multiple models in the class of linear up to generalized linear mixed models. The underlying maxT-test using mmm is discussed by means of several real data scenarios using selected R packages. Surprisingly, different features are highlighted, among them: (i) analyzing different-scaled, correlated, multiple endpoints, (ii) analyzing multiple correlated binary endpoints, (iii) modeling dose as qualitative factor and/or quantitative covariate, (iv) joint consideration of several tuning parameters within the poly-k trend test, (v) joint testing of dose and time, (vi) considering several effect sizes, (vii) joint testing of subgroups and overall population in multiarm randomized clinical trials with correlated primary endpoints, (viii) multiple linear mixed effect models, (ix) generalized estimating equations, and (x) nonlinear regression models.

With contemporary anesthetic drugs, the efficacy of general anesthesia is assured. Health-economic and clinical objectives are related to reductions in the variability in dosing, variability in recovery, etc. Consequently, meta-analyses for anesthesiology research would benefit from quantification of ratios of standard deviations of log-normally distributed variables (e.g., surgical duration). Generalized confidence intervals can be used, once sample means and standard deviations in the raw, time, scale, for each study and group have been used to estimate the mean and standard deviation of the logarithms of the times (i.e., "log-scale"). We examine the matching of the first two moments versus also using higher-order terms, following Higgins et al. 2008 and Friedrich et al. 2012. Monte Carlo simulations revealed that using the first two moments 95% confidence intervals had coverage 92%-95%, with small bias. Use of higher-order moments worsened confidence interval coverage for the log ratios, especially for coefficients of variation in the time scale of 50% and for larger $\left(n=50\right)$ sample sizes per group, resulting in 88% coverage. We recommend that for calculating confidence intervals for ratios of standard deviations based on generalized pivotal quantities and log-normal distributions, when relying on transformation of sample statistics from time to log scale, use the first two moments, not the higher order terms.

In a causal inference framework, a new metric has been proposed to quantify surrogacy for a continuous putative surrogate and a binary true endpoint, based on information theory. The proposed metric, termed the individual causal association (ICA), was quantified using a joint causal inference model for the corresponding potential outcomes. Due to the non-identifiability inherent in this type of models, a sensitivity analysis was introduced to study the behavior of the ICA as a function of the non-identifiable parameters characterizing the aforementioned model. In this scenario, to reduce uncertainty, several plausible yet untestable assumptions like monotonicity, independence, conditional independence or homogeneous variance-covariance, are often incorporated into the analysis. We assess the robustness of the methodology regarding these simplifying assumptions via simulation. The practical implications of the findings are demonstrated in the analysis of a randomized clinical trial evaluating an inactivated quadrivalent influenza vaccine.

For topical, dermatological drug products, an in vitro option to determine bioequivalence (BE) between test and reference products is recommended. In particular, in vitro permeation test (IVPT) data analysis uses a reference-scaled approach for two primary endpoints, cumulative penetration amount (AMT) and maximum flux (J _max), which takes the within donor variability into consideration. In 2022, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) published a draft IVPT guidance that includes statistical analysis methods for both balanced and unbalanced cases of IVPT study data. This work presents a comprehensive evaluation of various methodologies used to estimate critical parameters essential in assessing BE. Specifically, we investigate the performance of the FDA draft IVPT guidance approach alongside alternative empirical and model-based methods utilizing mixed-effects models. Our analyses include both simulated scenarios and real-world studies. In simulated scenarios, empirical formulas consistently demonstrate robustness in approximating the true model, particularly in effectively addressing treatment-donor interactions. Conversely, the effectiveness of model-based approaches heavily relies on precise model selection, which significantly influences their results. The research emphasizes the importance of accurate model selection in model-based BE assessment methodologies. It sheds light on the advantages of empirical formulas, highlighting their reliability compared to model-based approaches and offers valuable implications for BE assessments. Our findings underscore the significance of robust methodologies and provide essential insights to advance their understanding and application in the assessment of BE, employed in IVPT data analysis.

Several indices were suggested to determine the follow up duration in oncology trials from either maturity or stability perspective, by maximizing time $t$ such that the index was either greater or less than a pre-defined cutoff value. However, the selection of cutoff value was subjective and usually no commonly agreed cutoff value existed; sometimes one had to resort to simulations. To solve this problem, a new balance index was proposed, which integrated both data stability and data maturity. Its theoretical properties and relationships with other indices were investigated; then its performance was demonstrated through a case study. The highlights of the index are: (1) easy to calculate; (2) free of cutoff value selection; (3) generally consistent with the other indices while sometimes able to shorten the follow-up duration thus more flexible. For the cases where the new balance index cannot be calculated, a modified balance index was also proposed and discussed. For either single arm trial or randomized clinical trial, the two new balance indices can be implemented to widespread situations such as designing a new trial from scratch, or using aggregated trial information to inform the decision-making in the middle of trial conduct.

Treatment switching is common in randomized trials of oncology treatments. For example, control group patients may receive the experimental treatment as a subsequent therapy. One possible estimand is the effect of trial treatment if this type of switching had instead not occurred. Two-stage estimation is an established approach for estimating this estimand. We argue that other estimands of interest instead describe the effect of trial treatments if the proportion of patients who switched was different. We give precise definitions of such estimands. By motivating estimands using real-world data, decision-making in universal health care systems is facilitated. Focusing on estimation, we show that an alternative choice of secondary baseline, the time of first subsequent treatment, is easily defined, and widely applicable, and makes alternative estimands amenable to two-stage estimation. We develop methodology using propensity scores, to adjust for confounding at a secondary baseline, and a new quantile matching technique that can be used to implement any parametric form of the post-secondary baseline survival model. Our methodology was motivated by a recent immuno-oncology trial where a substantial proportion of control group patients subsequently received a form of immunotherapy.

A common feature in cohort studies is when there is a baseline measurement of the continuous follow-up or outcome variable. Common examples include baseline measurements of physiological characteristics such as blood pressure or heart rate in studies where the outcome is post-baseline measurement of the same variable. Methods incorporating the propensity score are increasingly being used to estimate the effects of treatments using observational studies. We examined six methods for incorporating the baseline value of the follow-up variable when using propensity score matching or weighting. These methods differed according to whether the baseline value of the follow-up variable was included or excluded from the propensity score model, whether subsequent regression adjustment was conducted in the matched or weighted sample to adjust for the baseline value of the follow-up variable, and whether the analysis estimated the effect of treatment on the follow-up variable or on the change from baseline. We used Monte Carlo simulations with 750 scenarios. While no analytic method had uniformly superior performance, we provide the following recommendations: first, when using weighting and the ATE is the target estimand, use an augmented inverse probability weighted estimator or include the baseline value of the follow-up variable in the propensity score model and subsequently adjust for the baseline value of the follow-up variable in a regression model. Second, when the ATT is the target estimand, regardless of whether using weighting or matching, analyze change from baseline using a propensity score that excludes the baseline value of the follow-up variable.