Multi-RegionalClinicalTrials(MRCTs):PracticeandIssuesofMulti-RegionalClinicalTrials’GlobalAcceptance
Withthanksto:BarbaraBiererMilaOwen
RebeccaLi,PhDExecutiveDirector
Disclaimer:
• TheopinionscontainedhereinarethoseoftheauthorsandarenotintendedtorepresentthepositionofBrighamandWomen'sHospitalorHarvardUniversity.
• TheMRCTCenterissupportedbyvoluntarycontributionsfromfoundations,corporations, internationalorganizations,academicinstitutionsandgovernmententities(seewww.MRCTCenter.org)andwellasbygrants.
• Wearecommittedtoautonomy inourresearchandtotransparency inourrelationships.TheMRCTCenter—and itsdirectors—retainresponsibilityandfinalcontrolofthecontentofanyproducts,resultsanddeliverables.
10/13/16 2
OurMission
Engagediversestakeholderstodefineemergingissuesinglobalclinicaltrialsandtocreateandimplementethical,actionable,andpracticalsolutions.
10/13/16 3
AgendaMRCTs:Science,andRegulations
• WhyMRCTs?• MRCTexpectations,benefitsandchallenges• Internationalandregulatoryconsiderations• Rationaleforacceptanceofforeigncountrydata• Bridgingstudyrequirements
10/13/16 4
AgendaMRCTs:Science,andRegulations
• WhyMRCTs?• MRCTexpectations,benefitsandchallenges• Internationalandregulatoryconsiderations• Rationaleforacceptanceofforeigncountrydata• Bridgingstudyrequirements
10/13/16 5
TwoStagesinNewDrugDevelopment1.Learningstage(phase1andphase2trials):
– Safety,Dosingselection,Patientpopulationselection– Efficacyscreeningusingsurrogateendpoint
2. Confirmingstage(phase3trials,e.g.,MRCT):– Efficacy(consistencyacrosssubgroups),– Safety,dosing,– Benefit/risk ratio
6 6
StagesofDrugDevelopment
MRCTs:PrinciplesandLogic
• MRCTsrarelyemployed inPhase1and2trials• MRCTsinPhase3clinicaltrials:
– Expeditedrugdevelopmentandrisk/benefitanalysis– Betterbasisforsubsequentgeneralizationofthefindings– Maintainsamestandardsformultipleregulatorysubmissions– Reduceunnecessarycostanddelay
• Assumptionofconsistency:thatregionsareequivalentandnosignificantdifferencesexist– Understandingofandstatistical
assessmentofconsistency– Impactofintrinsic/extrinsicfactorson
outcome
10/13/16 7
Coordinator
Region 1 Region 2 Region 3
Site 1 Site 2 Site 9 Site 10Site 11Site 12Site 13Site 7 Site 8Site 3 Site 4 Site 5 Site 6
MRCT:Definition
10/13/16
Aclinicaltrialwithacommonprotocol,involvingdifferentcentersandparticipantsenrolledfromdifferentregions(countries),wherethedata
collectedisanticipatedtobeanalyzedasawhole.*
*adaptedfromICH-E3
Coordinator
Region 1 Region 2 Region 3
Site 1 Site 2 Site 9 Site 10 Site 11 Site 12 Site 13Site 7 Site 8Site 3 Site 4 Site 5 Site 6
WhyMRCTs?
• Morepatientpopulationsavailableforstudy• Potentiallytreatmentnaïveindividuals• Maybeonlypracticalwayofaccruingsufficient
numbersofparticipantswithinagiventimeframe• Morerapidenrollmentfromwiderpopulationand
differingclinicalsituations• Potential importantinternalcomparisonsanddatato
defendgeneralizationofthefindings• Simultaneousratherthansequentialsubmissionsfor
registration
DrugLaginClinicalDevelopmentAmongVariousRegulatorySubmissionsStrategiesinJapan
ClinicalPharmacology&TherapeuticsVolume95,Issue5,pages533-541,8NOV2013DOI:10.1038/clpt.2013.223http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1038/clpt.2013.223/full#cptclpt2013223-fig-0001
MRCTsIncreaseEfficiencyandReduceDrugLag
Yourroleasregulatorisbecomingincreasinglycomplex
MAXIMIZEBENEFITBringbeneficialdrugstopatients
asquicklyaspossible
Maintainincentivesforcompanies&researchers to
innovate
DECREASERISKEnsuresafetyof
patientsbykeepingineffective/unsafedrugsoutofthe
market10/13/16 ©MRCT 11
HowdoMRCTsfitin?
FocusonMRCTsExaminingtheKeyIssues
Trueinconsistencyvs Randomvariation
Countryspecificpatient
requirements
DefiningRegion
Disparateresultsbyregion/roleofethnicity
Regulatorcapacityandtraining
Differingendpointsrequiredby
region
Dataquality
10/13/16 ©MRCT 12
MRCTs:notwithoutprecedentorguidance
• ICH-E5EthnicFactorsinAcceptabilityofForeignClinicalData– Bridgingstudies:
• Allowsextrapolationofdatafromoneregiontoanother
• Expeditesdrugdevelopmentprogram
• Formulti-regionalclinicaltrialtoserveasabridgingstudyforaparticularregion,shouldbe“persuasive”
• Therefore,MRCTshouldbeplannedwithsufficientnumbersofsubjectstohaveadequatepowertohaveareasonablelikelihoodofshowinganeffect ineachregionofinterest
• Iftoserveasbridgingstudy,provideefficacyandsafetybyregion,andexamineconsistencyofeffectsacrossregions(andifdose-responserelationshipthenefficacyandsafetywithinandacrossregions.
10/13/16 ©MRCT 13
MRCTs:PrecedentandGuidance
• ICH-E3StructureandContentofClinicalStudyReport– Individualcenterresultsshouldbepresentedwhenappropriate(sufficient
#,etc.)
– Treatment-by-center (country)analysisshouldbeexplored
– “…Anyextremeoroppositeresultsamongcentersshouldbenotedanddiscussed,consideringsuchpossibilitiesasdifferences instudyconduct,patientcharacteristics,orclinicalsettings.”
• ICH-E9StatisticalPrinciplesforClinicalTrials– Protocolimplementationshouldbeclearandsimilaratallsites
– Procedures standardized,variationreduced
– “…theusualsamplesizeandpowercalculationsdependupontheassumptionthatthedifferences between thecomparedtreatmentsinthecentersareunbiasedestimatesofthesamequantity.”
10/13/16 ©MRCT 14
MRCTDesign
• Implicationsfor– Studydesign– Choiceofendpoint(s)
• Particularlyproblematicifregulatoryguidancediffersastowhatisacceptablestudydesignorendpoint
If results of an MRCT are positive with acceptable benefit/risk ratio for a new drug, then further region subgroup analysis can be explored through different statistical methods depending on the level of “consistency” required.
10/13/16 ©MRCT 15
Howisconsistencyconsidered?
Howis“subgroup”defined?
AgendaMRCTs:Science,andRegulations
• WhyMRCTs?• MRCTexpectationsanddesign• MRCTchallenges• Internationalandregulatoryconsiderations• Rationaleforacceptanceofforeigncountrydata• Bridgingstudyrequirements
10/13/16 16
CurrentChallengesGloballyontheStatusofMRCTs
• No clear global guidance on MRCTs
• Individual countries have published statements on topics related to MRCTs (including China)
• Use of foreign clinical data varies across countries
• Need for bridging studies or separate studies in the region’s population– Ethnic factors and considerations (ICH 5)
– Subgroup analysis
MRCT:Ethnicvariationvs.RandomVariation(continued)
• ManyofusmakeanaprioriassumptionofMRCTsthatnooronlyminorregionalvariationexists
• Nodatanowtopredictwhichtrials(ordrugs,interventions,devices)arelikelytodemonstratesubgroupdifferencesandnowaytodistinguishtrueconsistencyissuesorethnicvariationfrommererandomvariability.
10/13/16 ©MRCT 18
MRCTChallenges
•Whiletheresultsofmostmulti-nationaltrialsdonotdemonstrateanyinternalinconsistencyamongregionsorcountries,onoccasioninconsistencybetweenregionsorcountries isobservedandmaybedueto:
• Inaccuraciesindiagnosesordifferences innaturalhistoryorstageofdisease
• Differences inmedicalorstudypractice(s)orconcurrentmedications• Differences inlifestyle,diet,orenvironmentalinfluences• Truegenetic,racial,orethnicdifferences amongtheregions• Randomvariation• Inconsistencyatsite,regionorcountrylevel
AgendaMRCTs:Science,andRegulations
• WhyMRCTs?• MRCTexpectations,benefitsandchallenges• Internationalandregulatoryconsiderations• Rationaleforacceptanceofforeigncountrydata• Bridgingstudyrequirements
10/13/16 20
ComparisonTableforForeignDataAcceptance
10/13/16 ©MRCT 21
ForeignData LocalParticipants DataAnalysisU.S. Foreigndataallowedif
relevant andapplicable.Notrequiredbutsometimespreferred
Recommendsdecreasingdatavariability
China Accepted(exceptforbiologics),butlocaldatarequired.
Preciserequirementsforeachphase.100pairs.Draft ProvisionsforDrugRegistrationissued.
Trend consistencyacrosslocalandglobalpopulation
India AllowedexceptforphaseItrialsandvaccinetrials.
Precise requirementsforeachphase.
Nospecificrequirements
E.U AcceptedifincompliancewithmemberandEUlaw.
Notrequired. Intrinsic/Extrinsicfactorsconsideredwhenextrapolatingdata.
Japan Accepted unlessissueswithlocalparticipantordatarequirements.
15-20%required. Datamustbe consistentacrosslocalandglobalpopulation– specificmethods
Aus,Can, S.Africa,Brazil,Mex,Turkey,S.Korea
No specificrequirements Notrequired Nospecificrequirements
MRCTs:AsiaPacificCountries
• Simplerregulatoryframeworks– Korea,Taiwan,HongKong,Singapore,Australia,NewZealand
• Morerigorousrequirementsandprocedures– Japan– requiresspecificparticipantnumbersandconsistencyacrossglobaltrialandlocally
– ImpactfulnewlegislationwithshortimplementationwindowØ China:IMCTapplicationinChinaØ India:PhaseIallowedonlyifIndiancompany,bridgingrequiredand
otherregulationsimposedoverlast3years
10/13/16 22
Sample Size Requirement in New Drug Registration – China (May change with new draft legislation)
10/13/16 ©MRCT 23
Current China Regulatory Policies for the Registration - Interpretation
•如果不考虑在中国注册上市:样本量无要求(No requirement for sample size if not considering China registration)
•MRCT数据用于国内上市注册(首先在国外上市)(MRCT data and results for China registration, must be used for approval (and approved) in overseas)
– 如果中国部分结果与总体结果一致, 则按照进口药品注册的临床试验要求(If China subgroup results are consistent with overall results, then China registration needs:)
• 药代+至少100对受试者 (100 pairs + PK/PD)
– 如果中国部分结果与总体结果不一致,则按照适宜的桥接策略或重新进行针对中国人群的临床试验(要求具有统计显著性)(If China subgroup results are NOT consistent with overall results, then China registration needs a independent phase III trial with statistical significance)
HowtheUSFDAhasevolvedinConsideringMRCTs
• FollowingICH-E51,FDAdoesnotrequirestudiesthatareconductedsolelyoutsidetheU.S.tobeperformedunderanInvestigationalNewdrugApplication(IND)IntheU.S.,CFR21.314.106governswhichforeigndataareacceptable.
• localdataisnotneeded ifthreecriteriaaremet:– Theforeigndatamustbe“relevantandapplicable”totheUSpopulation.– Theforeignstudiesmustbeperformedbycompetentinvestigators.– TheFDAmusthaveconfidenceinandtheabilitytovalidateorverifythe
data.3
– AnapplicationbasedsolelyonforeignclinicaldatamaybeapprovedifdataareapplicabletotheUSpopulationandmedicalpractice.
– TheFDAmayrequirea“bridgingstudy”ifitisconcernedabouttheapplicabilityofastudy’sresultstoitspopulation.4
1. Khin,etal.“RegulatoryandScientificIssuesRegardingUseofForeignDatainSupportofNewDrugApplicationsintheUnitedStates:AnFDAPerspective,”Nature2. Food,DrugsandCosmeticsActof1938,mostrecentlyamended20163. 21CFR314.106.Theacceptanceofforeigndatainanewdrugapplication.4. ChinandBairu,“GlobalClinicalTrials:EffectiveImplementationandManagement“,AcademicPress2011
24
UnitedStatesFDA(Cont’d)
• Canaskfora“bridgingstudy”ifconcernsabouttheapplicabilityofastudy’sresultstoitspopulation
• Inthecaseofclearevidenceofanethnicdifference,separatetrialsarehighlyrecommendedsoregionalconsiderationscanbeincorporatedintothedesign;thetrialcanbeconductedtocontrolextrinsicfactorsenterastudypopulationwithrelativelyhomogenousintrinsicfactors
1.Khin,etal.“RegulatoryandScientificIssuesRegardingUseofForeignDatainSupportofNewDrugApplicationsintheUnitedStates:AnFDAPerspective,”Nature
FDA’sreviewofMRCT’sgenerallyinvolvesevaluationofstudyresults(statisticalanalyses)accordingtoregion/country
• Evaluatethestudydataandtheconductandkeymetricsofquality
• Evaluate statisticaldisplaysofkeysourcesofvariation,biasanduncertainty
• Regionalandsiteoutcomesevaluated:– Dropouts,differencesinresponserates,outcomes,covariates,exposures,follow-up,concomitantdrugs
• Individualpatientprofileswithinsites- whichsitesandwhichpatientrecordstoevaluateinmoredetail- possibleauditingstrategies(usuallyreliesonelectronicrecords)
• Possiblyintrinsicfactors(markers,gender,ethnicity)orpossiblyextrinsicfactors)recruitmentpatterns,medicalsupportsystem,standardsofcare
• Aligninspectionwithreviewofdataandinsightsforaudits
Interpretationoftheglobalestimateandregionspecificestimatesischallenging
andthecausesforheterogeneity
• Interpretationoftheglobalestimateandregionandspecificestimatesischallenging
• Oftenthecauseofheterogeneity(variabilitybetweenregions)isunknown
• Differencesintreatmenteffectsareexpected;however,toomuchheterogeneityisproblematic
• ArethesetreatmentdifferencesrealandaretheysystematicinthesensethattreatmenteffectsareconsistentlybetterorworseintheU.S.andwhatarethereasonsforit
WhatUSFDAconsiderswhenencounteringheterogeneity
StudyundertakenbyFDAstatisticianstoevaluatepossibilityofsystematicregionaldifferences
• Majorcardiovascularoutcomestudiesevaluatedoverthelast10years
• Overallstudyresultstatisticallypositive,ie.demonstratedoveralleffect
• Regionneverpre-specifiedasafactortobeevaluatedstatistically
• 24independentstudies
In 16/24 studies, the effect was less in US
P = 0.023
P = 0.007
“Heterogeneity” could be observed by chance
30
When fraction of Japanese is 6.7%, negative treatment effect is observed in Japanese with probability of ~20% by chance
Example: What should we do when difference is observed between Japanese & overall?
Basic Principles on Global Clinical Trials (Reference Cases)
• the reason for the difference should be considered by using data such as subgroup analysis
– not enough to conclude that difference is chance finding without any exploration
– one approach could be to evaluate to evaluate the difference in background characteristics between Japanese and overall population & to assess effect of the difference on efficacy results by using subgroup analysis in overall population
31
AnExample:Toprol–XL;theCurrentDrugLabel;“ClinicalTrials”
MERIT-HFwasadouble-blind, placebo-controlled studyofToprol-XLconducted in14countries including theUS.Itrandomized 3991patients(1990toToprol-XL)withejectionfraction </=0.40andNYHAClassII-IVheartfailureattributabletoischemia,hypertension,orcardiomyopathy.
Theprotocolexcludedpatientswithcontraindications tobeta-blockeruse,thoseexpectedtoundergoheartsurgery,andthosewithin28daysofmyocardial infarctionorunstableangina.
Theprimaryendpoints ofthetrialwere(1)all-causemortalityplusall-causehospitalization (timetofirstevent),and(2)all-causemortality.
The trial was terminated early for a statistically significant reduction in all-cause mortality (34%, nominal p=0.00009). …The figure below illustrates principal results for a wide variety of subgroup comparisons, including US vs. non-US populations (the latter of which was not pre-specified). The combined endpoints of all-cause mortality plus all-cause hospitalization and of mortality plus heart failure hospitalization showed consistent effects in the overall study population and the subgroups, including women and the US population. However, in the US subgroup and women, overall mortality and cardiovascular mortality appeared less affected. Analyses of female and US patients were carried out because they each represented about 25% of the overall population. Nonetheless, subgroup analyses can be difficult to interpret and it is not known whether these represent true differences or chance effects.
MERIT-HFResults
35
HowtoAssessConsistencyinanMRCT?
“Trend”AnalysisLinkagetoConsistency
Benefit
Risk
Overall Population
Overall Population
Benefit
Risk
Consistent
Consistent
Consistent
Safetyrisksobservedfromsubpopulation/region
EfficacybenefitobservedfromasubpopulationorInaregion
“Trend”AnalysisInterpretation&Elaboration- LinkagetoConsistency
Benefit
Risk
Overall Population
Overall Population
Benefit
Risk
Consistent?
Consistent?
Consistent?
Safetyrisksobservedfromsubpopulation
Efficacybenefitobservedfromsubpopulation
“Trend”AnalysisInterpretation&Elaboration- LinkagetoConsistency
Similarrisks
Similarefficacy
PositiveTrend
Similarrisks
Betterefficacy
PositiveTrend
Chinesesubpopulation vs.overallpopulationinapositivetrial
Lowerrisks(?)
Similarefficacy
PositiveTrend
√
√
√Lowerrisks(?)
Lowerefficacy
PositiveTrend(?) ?
39
ConsistencyAssessmentinMRCT- LevelofConsistencywithStatisticalMethods
Consistency and Disease Categories
Consistency should be considered with different disease settings. Considering medical needs and potential impact of ethnic factors in clinical practice, three different disease categories may be considered:
Category 1: Unmet medical needs and/or rare disease
Category 2: Common disease without potential ethnic differences
Category 3: Common disease with potential ethnic differences
10/13/16 ©MRCT 40
Consistency and Disease Categories
Consistency should be considered with different disease settings. Considering medical needs and potential impact of ethnic factors in clinical practice, three different disease categories may be considered:
Category 1: Unmet medical needs and/or rare diseaseSame trend required
Category 2: Common disease without potential ethnic differencesTreatment effect proportional
Category 3: Common disease with potential ethnic differences Treatment effect in region demonstrates clinicalsignificance with statistical rigor.
10/13/16 ©MRCT 41
42
Disease Category 1
• Level1consistencyrequired:toassessregionaltreatmenteffectindiseasewithunmetmedicalneeds,e.g.,HIV/AIDS,somemalignanttumor,raredisease,etal.
Disease Category 2
• Level2consistencyrequired:toassessregionaltreatmenteffectforcommondiseasewithnoevidenceofpotentialethnicdifferenceintreatment.Inthissetting, certainregionaleffectsizeisrequired
Disease Category 3
• Level3consistencyrequired: toassessregionaltreatmenteffectforcommondiseasewithevidenceofpotentialethnicdifferenceintreatment. Inthissettingclinicalsignificancewithstatistical rigorofregional treatmenteffectisrequired.
Level of Consistency for Different Disease Categories
Equivalency Proportionality Clinical significance with statistical rigor
Level1
Level2
Level3
Statistical Rigor
Quantitative
Qualitative
LevelofConsistency:from“weak”to“strong”定量
定性
统计学严谨性
Level1Consistency;ObservationaltrendAlltreatmenteffects>0
10/13/16 ©MRCT 4444
Level2Consistency,Treatmenteffectsareproportional;Atleast50%retention
10/13/16 ©MRCT 4545
Level 3 Consistency,Treatment effect in region demonstrates clinical significance with statistical rigor.
10/13/16 ©MRCT 46
10# 10#
7#
0#1#2#3#4#5#6#7#8#9#
10#11#
Global#Effect# Regional#Effect#Example#
Regional#Effect#Example#
Treatment(Effect(
46
Level3Consistency:Overalltreatmenteffectsandforregionachieveclinicalsignificancewithstatisticalrigor
• Toachievestatisticalrigorforbothoverallandregionalsubgroup,useeitherdatawithinMRCTOR datafromMRCTplusanextensiontrial, ifthesamplesizeintheMRCTisnotadequatetoassessclinicallymeaningfultreatmenteffectwith statisticalrigor.
• Toachievestatisticalrigorfortheregionalresults, informationfortheregionanalysismaycombinebothregioninformationandtheinformationborrowedfromotherregions.Theinformationborrowedwillbedown-weighted
10/13/16 ©MRCT 47
MRCT
NTETE
ExtensionofMRCT
TE
NTE(down-weighted when
combined for analyses)
TE
Where:TE: targeted ethnic groupNTE: non-targeted ethnic group
Conclusions
IncreasinguseofMRCTdesigninworldwidedrugdevelopment
• Toexpeditesimultaneous newdrugdevelopmentwithgreaterpatientpopulations
• Tomaintainthesamelevelofscientificrigorinthetrialdesignwhentheoutcomesarepresentedtodifferentregulatoryagenciesforevaluation
• Positiveresultsandbenefit/riskratioofMRCTprovidesolidbasis forthetotalityofevidenceforanewdrugregistrationglobally
Opportunities
• Continuerefinementofconsiderationofrequirementsfor“consistency”
• Enhancepost-approvalmonitoringandpharmacovigilance globally
• RegulatoryconvergencesurroundingcountryspecificrequirementsforMRCTs
MRCT– theOpportunityandPromise
• AdvancingthepracticeofMRCTsgloballywillsupportsimultaneousglobalsubmissions– Shiftingfocusfrompatientnumberrequirementstoaregionalperspectiveofthetotalstudypopulationsizedrivenbythestudyobjectiveandoverallhypothesis
– Emphasisonregulatorydecisionsbasedonbenefit-riskofdiseasestate,patientpopulation,unmetmedicalneedindeterminationofPhase3requirements
10/13/16 ©MRCT 49
QuestionsforDiscussion
• WhenconductinganMRCT withsequentialparticipantsenrolled,– Whatistheimpactontheoverallresults?– Arethecountry/regionalresultsaloneinterpretable?
• WheninterpretingtheregionalresultsinMRCT– Ifvariabilityexists,howtointerpretand/ordealwithit?Validityissueor
Qualityissueorboth?• Extrapolationoftreatmenteffects toChinapopulationwithheterogeneity(QuantitativeandQualitative) oftreatmenteffectsamongregions/Countries.
• Interpretationoftreatmenteffects:whichfactor(s)mostimportanttoevaluaterelationshipoftreatmenteffects:Site/center/clinic,Country,Region?
50
Thankyou
10/13/16 51