Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24571662›Full record

ArticleTrials2014

Accelerating clinical development of HIV vaccine strategies: methodological challenges and considerations in constructing an optimised multi-arm phase I/II trial design.

Laura Richert, Adélaïde Doussau, Jean-Daniel Lelièvre, Vincent Arnold, Véronique Rieux, Amel Bouakane, Yves Lévy, Geneviève Chêne, Rodolphe Thiébaut, Vaccine Research Institute (VRI)

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Trials, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. HIV-1 prophylactic vaccines: state of the art.Journal of virus eradication · 2016
    Review
  5. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Laura Richert
Adélaïde Doussau
Jean-Daniel Lelièvre
Vincent Arnold
Véronique Rieux
Amel Bouakane
Yves Lévy
Geneviève Chêne
Rodolphe ThiébautUniversité Bordeaux, ISPED, Centre INSERM U897-Epidemiologie-Biostatistique, Bordeaux, F-33000, France. rodolphe.thiebaut@isped.u-bordeaux2.fr.
Vaccine Research Institute (VRI)

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMany candidate vaccine strategies against human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection are under study, but their clinical development is lengthy and iterative. To accelerate HIV vaccine development optimised trial designs are needed. We propose a randomised multi-arm phase I/II design for early stage development of several vaccine strategies, aiming at rapidly discarding those that are unsafe or non-immunogenic.

methodsWe explored early stage designs to evaluate both the safety and the immunogenicity of four heterologous prime-boost HIV vaccine strategies in parallel. One of the vaccines used as a prime and boost in the different strategies (vaccine 1) has yet to be tested in humans, thus requiring a phase I safety evaluation. However, its toxicity risk is considered minimal based on data from similar vaccines. We newly adapted a randomised phase II trial by integrating an early safety decision rule, emulating that of a phase I study. We evaluated the operating characteristics of the proposed design in simulation studies with either a fixed-sample frequentist or a continuous Bayesian safety decision rule and projected timelines for the trial.

resultsWe propose a randomised four-arm phase I/II design with two independent binary endpoints for safety and immunogenicity. Immunogenicity evaluation at trial end is based on a single-stage Fleming design per arm, comparing the observed proportion of responders in an immunogenicity screening assay to an unacceptably low proportion, without direct comparisons between arms. Randomisation limits heterogeneity in volunteer characteristics between arms. To avoid exposure of additional participants to an unsafe vaccine during the vaccine boost phase, an early safety decision rule is imposed on the arm starting with vaccine 1 injections. In simulations of the design with either decision rule, the risks of erroneous conclusions were controlled <15%. Flexibility in trial conduct is greater with the continuous Bayesian rule. A 12-month gain in timelines is expected by this optimised design. Other existing designs such as bivariate or seamless phase I/II designs did not offer a clear-cut alternative.

conclusionsBy combining phase I and phase II evaluations in a multi-arm trial, the proposed optimised design allows for accelerating early stage clinical development of HIV vaccine strategies.

Indexed as

Research DesignAIDS VaccinesBayes TheoremClinical Trials, Phase I as TopicClinical Trials, Phase II as TopicComputer SimulationDecision Support TechniquesHIV InfectionsHumansMulticenter Studies as TopicRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeAIDS Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID24571662
PMCPMC3941694

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.