comparing the time to response in antidepressant clinical trials l.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Comparing the Time to Response in Antidepressant Clinical Trials PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Comparing the Time to Response in Antidepressant Clinical Trials

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 30

Comparing the Time to Response in Antidepressant Clinical Trials - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 208 Views
  • Uploaded on

Comparing the Time to Response in Antidepressant Clinical Trials. Roy N. Tamura, Ph.D. Eli Lilly and Company Indianapolis, Indiana 2001 Purdue University Department of Statistics Seminar. Comparing the Time to Response in Antidepressant Clinical Trials.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Comparing the Time to Response in Antidepressant Clinical Trials' - benjamin


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
comparing the time to response in antidepressant clinical trials

Comparing the Time to Response in Antidepressant Clinical Trials

Roy N. Tamura, Ph.D.

Eli Lilly and Company

Indianapolis, Indiana

2001 Purdue University

Department of Statistics Seminar

comparing the time to response in antidepressant clinical trials2
Comparing the Time to Response in Antidepressant Clinical Trials

I. Background on Depression and Depression Clinical Trials

II. Cure Model for Time to Response

III. Test of Latency for Cure Model

IV. Proportional Hazards Cure Model

major depression
Major Depression
  • Lifetime risk: Women: 10-25% Men: 5-12%
  • Average age at onset: mid-20s
  • Course of illness:
    • 50-60% of patients will have a 2nd episode
cost of depression
Cost of Depression
  • Estimated Annual Costs to Business in the US: >40 billion dollars
    • Absenteeism
    • Lost Productivity
    • Suicides
    • Treatment/Rehabilitation

MIT Sloan School of Management Study

treatment options for depression
Treatment Options for Depression

1. Medication

Tricyclics (Impramine, Amitriptyline)

SSRI’s (Prozac, Zoloft, Paxil)

Others (Wellbutrin)

2. Therapy

Cognitive Behavioral

Interpersonal

3. Electroshock

clinical trials
Clinical Trials
  • Patients meeting diagnostic criteria for depression are randomly assigned to treatment groups
  • Patients are scheduled for visits to a psychiatrist at prespecified visit intervals up to some time point (usually 6-8 weeks)
  • At each visit, severity of depression is assessed using a structured interview and depression rating scale
important efficacy components of an antidepressant
Important Efficacy Components of an Antidepressant

1. Response Rate

2. Time to Response

Response usually defined by change in a rating scale like CGI or Hamilton Depression Scale.

cure model h t p s t 1 p
Cure Model: H(t) = p S(t) + (1-p)

H(t) is the probability that time to response > t

p is the probability of response

S(t) is the probability that time to response > t among

patients who respond

cure model terminology
Cure Model Terminology
  • Proportion of responders (p): incidence
  • Time to response for responders (S(t)): latency
slide10

Nonparametric Generalized Maximum Likelihood Estimates:

^

^

p = 1 - H(u)

^

^

^

^

S(t) = (H(t) - (1 - p )) / p

^

where H is the Kaplan-Meier product limit estimator, and

u is the endpoint of the trial.

slide11

Six Week Trial of Fluoxetine vs Fluoxetine

+ Pindolol in Major Depressive Disorder

One Hundred Eleven Randomized Patients

Twice Weekly Visits for First Three Weeks, Weekly

Visits Thereafter

Response: 50% or greater reduction in HAMD 17 item

from baseline

why not look at h t time to response for all patients
Why not look at H(t)? Time to response for all patients

Antidepressant A: 50% response rate

Everyone responds at exactly two weeks

Antidepressant B: 90% response rate

Everyone responds at exactly two weeks

Antidepressant B is more effective than Antidepressant A

but does not exhibit faster onset of action.

suppose we want to compare incidence and latency between 2 drugs in a clinical trial
Suppose we want to compare incidence and latency between 2 drugs in a clinical trial
  • Incidence: several tests available (Laska and Meisner, 1992)
  • Latency: few tests in the literature until this past year
slide17

S is a weighted pooled estimate of S from S1 and S2.

Tamura, Faries & Feng, 2000

A Two-Sample Cramer-von Mises Test Statistic:

ó

^

^

^

^

^

^

^

W2 = -(n1p1) (n2p2) / (n1p1 + n2p2) [S1(t) - S2(t)]2 dS (t)

õ

^

^

^

bootstrap for cramer von mises statistic
Bootstrap for Cramer von Mises statistic

From the sample data, construct C1, C2, p1, p2, S

where C1 and C2 are the Kaplan-Meier estimates

of the censoring distributions for Groups 1 and 2

bootstrap for cramer von mises statistic19
Bootstrap for Cramer von Mises statistic

1. Generate Z, a Bernoulli random variable (pi).

2. If Z = 1, then generate response time T* from S. If Z = 0, then set

T* arbitrarily large.

3. Generate censoring time U* from Ci.

4. Construct the pair (y*, *) where y* is the

minimum of u* and t*, and * is the indicator

variable taking the value 1 if t* is less than u*.

Repeat Steps 1-4 for sample sizes of the trial and construct a

bootstrap test statistic value W2*.

Use the empirical distribution of W2* to determine p-values

for the observed value of W2.

d

d

slide20

Fluoxetine / Pindolol Case Study

  • Cramer-von Mises Statistic W2 = .247, bootstrap p =.204
  • Proportions Test of Equality of Incidence Z=2.33, p =.020
slide21

Simulation Study of CvM/bootstrap procedure:

Seven Scheduled Visits

Sample Sizes: 50 - 100 per group

Response Rates: 0.6 - 0.9 (equal and unequal across groups)

Censoring Rates: 0 - 50%

Proportional Hazards: S2(t) = {S1(t)}b

S1 chosen as Weibull (median time to response  17 days)

1000 realizations, each realization uses 1000 bootstrap

repetitions

slide22

Simulation Results for

n1 = n2 = 75 Nominal = 0.05

p1 p2 Censoring b Rejection Rate

.6 .6 None 1 .049

.6 .6 Moderate (35%) 1 .048

.6 .6 Heavy (52%) 1 .073

.6 .6 None 1.5 .322

.6 .6 Moderate 1.5 .279

.6 .6 Heavy 1.5 .195

.6 .6 None 2 .764

.6 .6 Moderate 2 .710

.6 .6 Heavy 2 .533

.6 .6 None 2.5 .938

.6 .6 Moderate 2.5 .904

.6 .6 Heavy 2.5 .805

NOTE: b = 2.5 corresponds to shift in median time to response

from 17 days to 11 days.

slide23

Comments

  • 1. Active comparator antidepressant trials usually have low drop-out rates.
  • 2. Simulations of weekly assessments versus instantaneous observation of response suggest little effect on level or power of Cramer-von Mises test.
  • 3. Typical antidepressant clinical trials have power to detect a 5-7 day shift in median time to response.
slide24

A proportional hazards cure model

H(t)=p(x) S(t) + (1-p(x))

where p(x) = Pr(Response; x) = exp(x'b) / (1+ exp(x'b))

and S(t) = (S0(t))exp(z')

Kuk and Chen, 1992

Sy and Taylor, 2000

proportional hazards cure model
Proportional hazards cure model
  • Estimate b, , and S0(t) using maximum likelihood. Inference about parameters b and  based on observed information matrix.
  • Constraining S0(t) to zero after the last observed response time leads to better estimation.

Sy and Taylor, 2000

slide27

PH Cure Model - Pindolol Case Study

Baseline covariates: melancholia diagnosis (yes/no) and HAMD 17 score.

slide28

Comments on PH Cure Model

1. Attractive to be able to adjust for covariates.

2. Computationally intensive. Can't ignore S0(t)

3. Increased Type I error for latency parameter  in presence of heavy censoring.

summary
Summary

1. Examining time to response increasing in importance in tests of new antidepressants.

2. Cure model is a simple way to separate incidence from latency.

3. Tests of latency possible using CvM statistic or cure model PH analyses.

4. Both CvM and PH analyses of latency need low censoring to preserve nominal level.

references
References
  • Laska, EM, Meisner, MJ. Nonparametric estimation and testing in a cure model. Biometrics 1992; 48: 1223-1234.
  • Tamura, RN, Faries, DE, Feng, J. Comparing time to onset of response in antidepressant clinical trials using the cure model and the Cramer-von Mises test. Statistics in Medicine 2000; 19: 2169-2184.
  • Kuk, AYC, Chen, CH. A mixture model combining logistic regression with proportional hazards regression. Biometrika 1992; 79: 531-541.
  • Sy, JP, Taylor, JMG. Estimation in a Cox proportional hazards cure model. Biometrics 2000; 56: 227-236.