Issues in the simulation and analysis of qtc interval data
Download
1 / 37

- PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 186 Views
  • Uploaded on

Issues in the Simulation and Analysis of QTc Interval Data. Peter L. Bonate, PhD, FCP ILEX Oncology San Antonio, TX November 2003. Objectives. Review issues in the analysis of QTc interval data

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 '' - jenn


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
Issues in the simulation and analysis of qtc interval data l.jpg

Issues in the Simulation and Analysis of QTc Interval Data

Peter L. Bonate, PhD, FCP

ILEX Oncology

San Antonio, TX

November 2003


Objectives l.jpg
Objectives

  • Review issues in the analysis of QTc interval data

  • Present results of analysis of placebo ECG data and illustrate the use of Monte Carlo simulation to determine the false-positive rate of common metrics used to assess QTc prolongation

    • Illustrate pitfalls in the interpretation of model-based QTc interval analyses

  • Illustrate use of Monte Carlo simulation in analysis of the PK-PD relationship of a new drug


Metrics for analysis of qtc interval data from least to most sensitive l.jpg
Metrics for analysis of QTc interval data from least to most sensitive

  • Mean QTc interval

  • Maximal QTc interval

  • Area under the QTc interval-time profile

  • Maximal change from baseline

  • Maximal QTc interval with baseline as covariate

  • Area under the QTc interval-time profile with baseline as covariate

About

Equal

About

Equal

Bonate PL: Rank power of metrics used to assess QTc interval prolongation by clinical trial simulation. J Clin Pharmacol 40; 2000: 468-74.


Guidelines for prolonged qtc l.jpg
Guidelines for “Prolonged QTc” sensitive

  • EMEA, 1997

    • > 450 msec in males

    • > 470 msec in males

    • > 60 msec change from baseline

    • QTc > 500 msec

  • Mean change from baseline during dosing interval

    • 5 msec = prolonged ???

  • No guidelines for AUC-based metrics


Stages of acceptance l.jpg
Stages of Acceptance sensitive

  • What QTc effect?

  • We have a QTc effect but we’re no worse than other drugs already on the market

    • Telithromycin, ziprasidone

  • We have a QTc effect and we will characterize it


Slide6 l.jpg

Analysis of Placebo Data From Healthy Normal Volunteers sensitive

  • Experimental Design (1999)

  • Objective was to characterize the QTc-dose response relationship

  • Single-center, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 4-way crossover

  • 40 subjects (20 males and 20 females)

    • usual inclusion-exclusion criterion for Phase I study, e.g., 18 to 50, not pregnant, no previous ingestion of study medication, etc.


Slide7 l.jpg

  • 3 doses (10, 30, and 60 mg QD for 7 days) sensitive

  • Placebo day (Day -1) prior to dosing

  • 1 week washout between periods

  • Meals were given at breakfast (~1 hour post-dose), lunch (~5 hours post-dose), dinner (~11 hours post-dose), and snack (~9 PM)

  • All ECGs were taken prior to meals, if they were scheduled at the same time

Reference: PL Bonate: Assessment of QTc Interval Prolongation in a Phase I Study Using Monte Carlo Simulation. In: Simulation For Clinical Trials (Kimko HC, Duffull SB, ed.) Marcel Dekker, 2002, pp. 353-367.


Ecg assessments l.jpg
ECG Assessments sensitive

  • 0, 1.5, 3, 6, 9, 12, and 24 h on Day -1 (placebo lead-in), Day 1, and Day 8

  • pre-dose on Days 4, 5, 6, and 7

  • Over-read by a cardiologist blinded to treatment, time post-dose, and period

  • QTcB intervals were calculated for each lead

  • The largest QTcB interval was reported


What is the baseline l.jpg
What is the baseline? sensitive

  • Average of pre-dose at time 0 prior to dosing

    • Will fail to correct for natural circadian rhythm

    • Replicate measurements better than single measurements

  • Mean of placebo day

    • Robust because it is based on many measurements

    • Also fails to correct for circadian rhythm

    • Not usually possible with Phase II or III studies

  • Point to point with placebo administration

    • Corrects for circadian rhythm

    • Not robust because often based on single measurement

    • Not usually possible with Phase II or III studies

    • Day -1 or placebo period?


Slide10 l.jpg

Placebo ECG Model sensitive

  • Covariates available:

    • Period, day, and time of ECG

    • Chest lead

    • Time of last meal

    • Sex

    • Race

    • Baseline calcium and potassium

    • Body surface area

    • Stress (Days with many ECGs more stressful than days with only 1 ECG)


Population pd modeling l.jpg
Population PD Modeling sensitive

  • Linear mixed effect models were used with NONMEM, version 5

  • All models were developed sequentially using LRT

  • All factors entered into the model in a linear manner

  • All random effects were treated as normally distributed


Slide12 l.jpg

ECG Results sensitive

  • Total variance of 769 ECGs from 40 subjects

    • 449 msec2 (5.1% CV)

  • Values increased over time (trend effect)

  • Chest lead IV was greater than other leads

  • Food increased QTcB intervals:

    • breakfast < lunch < dinner

  • QTcB intervals were higher on days with intensive sampling (Day 1, 2, and 8)

  • Females > Males



Slide14 l.jpg

Day 1 sensitive

Breakfast Lunch Dinner


What was the intrinsic variability in qtc intervals l.jpg
What was the Intrinsic Variability in QTc Intervals? sensitive

  • Between-subject variability

    • 147 msec2

    • 12 msec SD (~3.1% CV)

  • Within-subject variability

    • 252 msec2

    • 16 msec SD (~4.1% CV)

    • Consists of measurement variance and true unexplained variance

    • Future studies should do repeated ECGs at each time point to assess measurement variability

  • IOV was less than 10 msec2


Intrinsic variability in time averaged qtc auc l.jpg
Intrinsic Variability in Time-Averaged QTc AUC sensitive

  • TA-QTc = AUC calculated over 12 hour/12 h

  • Linear Mixed Effect Models

    • Covariates: period, sex, Ca, K, BSA, race, day

    • Random intercept model

    • Simple residual error model

    • Variance component for group

  • No covariates were statistically significant

    • LS Mean: 400( 2.39) msec

    • Between-subject variability: 181 msec2

    • Residual variability: 59 msec2

    • Females may be greater than males (404 vs. 396, p = 0.11)


The utility of simulation l.jpg
The Utility of Simulation sensitive

  • Heuristic tool to increase understanding

  • Assist in discovery and formulation of new hypotheses

  • Prediction

  • Substitute for humans (expert systems)

  • Training

  • Entertainment


What is needed for simulation of qtc trials l.jpg
What is Needed for Simulation of QTc Trials? sensitive

  • What is the primary metric of interest?

    • What is the variability of this metric in the population of interest? What is its distribution?

    • If unknown, what about in healthy volunteers and can that variability be extrapolated?

  • What is the pharmacokinetic model?

    • Is a pharmacokinetic model needed?

  • What is the appropriate concentration-QTc model and what is the variability in those parameter estimates?

  • What is the experimental design?


Application of placebo model food effects can act like drug effects l.jpg
Application of Placebo Model: sensitiveFood Effects Can Act Like Drug Effects

  • Simulated 100 subjects after oral administration of a NCE with same time points as previous study

  • Concentration and QTc were independent

  • Analyze QTc interval data with Proc Mixed in SAS using a random effects model

Proc mixed;

class subject;

model QTc = concentration;

random intercept concentration / subject=subject type=un;

run; quit;


Slide22 l.jpg

1-compartment model sensitive

Ka = 0.7 per hour

Kel = 0.15 per hour

Vd = 125 L

Dose = 75 mg


Slide23 l.jpg


Slide24 l.jpg

What about using change from baseline where baseline is time 0?

Pre-dose QTc values are inadequate

as a baseline

  • p-value for concentration < 0.0001

  • for every 100 ng/mL  in concentration there will

  • be a 2.2 msec  in QTc intervals


Application of placebo model what is the false positive rate l.jpg
Application of Placebo Model: 0?What is the false-positive rate?

  • Monte Carlo simulation using the placebo model was used to assess

    • What percent of subjects will have a QTc interval more than

      • 470 msec for females,

      • 450 msec for males, or

      • 500 msec in general?

    • What % of subjects will have a change from baseline of 30 to 60 msec, or > 60 msec?

  • 5000 subjects sampled at 0, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 24 hours



Application 3 modeling effect of bsa on qtc l.jpg
Application 3: 0?Modeling Effect of BSA on QTc

  • 2-compartment oral with lag time best structural model

  • Drug was known to prolong HERG channel

  • BSA was known to be an important covariate in the pharmacokinetics of Drug X by affecting Q

  • Is BSA an important covariate for QTc intervals?


Slide28 l.jpg


Methods l.jpg
Methods 0?

  • Simulate placebo ECG lead-in day (Day –1)

  • Simulate concentration-time profile of Drug X for 250 subjects at steady-state

    • at doses of 10 to 60 mg QD

    • over weights 1.2 to 2.2 m2

  • Simulate placebo QTc data over dosing interval

  • Add drug effect to placebo effect

  • Calculate maximal QTc, maximal dQTc, and average dQTc for each subject

  • Compute means by dose and weight

  • Fit response surface by dose, BSA, and dose by BSA interaction


Slide30 l.jpg

Mean Change From Baseline (Placebo Day –1) 0?

6

5

4

3

2

1

60

45

0

30

-1

Dose (mg)

2.2

15

2.0

1.8

1.6

1.4

0

BSA (m**2)

1.2

Females

5 msec

Average dQTC = 0.07928*Dose R2 = 0.99


Slide31 l.jpg

Mean Change From Baseline (Placebo Day –1) 0?

6

5

4

3

2

1

60

45

0

30

-1

Dose (mg)

2.2

15

2.0

1.8

1.6

1.4

0

BSA (m**2)

1.2

Males

5 msec

Average dQTC = 0.07928*Dose R2 = 0.99


Application 4 power of a phase ii study l.jpg
Application 4: 0?Power of a Phase II Study

  • Given the following design what is the probability of detecting a exposure-QTc relationship in the population of interest

    • 10, 20, or 40 mg (1:1:1) once daily for 8 weeks

    • ECGs collected on Day –1, Week 4, and Week 8 at 0 and 4 h post-dose (0.5 h on Day –1)

    • Sample size 30 to 120 by 10

    • Analyze results using linear mixed effect models

      class subject sex day time;

      model qtc = sex day time(day) conc baseline;

      random intercept conc / subject=subject type=un;

    • Repeat simulation 250 times


Slide33 l.jpg

Power = 0?

(# of simulations with p < 0.05)/(Total number of simulations) * 100%


Unresolved issues l.jpg
Unresolved Issues 0?

  • Choice of covariance matrix

    • Between-subject (simple, unstructured, CSH)?

    • Within-subject (simple, spatial, toeplitz)?

  • ML or REML

  • Best model selection criteria

    • AIC, AICc, BIC


Summary l.jpg
Summary 0?

  • Many Phase 1 studies where pre-dose ECGs are used as a baseline may show an artifactual relationship to drug concentrations simply because of the food effect on QTc intervals

  • There will be a false-positive rate

    • What are we willing to live with?

  • Simulation can be a powerful to help interpret results and to plan studies


Opinion l.jpg
Opinion 0?

  • QTc is no different than other laboratory parameters

  • How do we measure it?

    • Slavic devotion to outdated correction formula

      • Bazett

  • What is clinically relevant?


ad