Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30419965›Full record

ArticleOrphanet journal of rare diseases2018

Applicability and added value of novel methods to improve drug development in rare diseases.

Marian Mitroiu, Katrien Oude Rengerink, Caridad Pontes, Aranzazu Sancho, Roser Vives, Stella Pesiou, Juan Manuel Fontanet, Ferran Torres, Stavros Nikolakopoulos, Konstantinos Pateras and 8 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Orphanet journal of rare diseases, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Bayesian Approaches for Confirmatory Trials in Rare Diseases: Opportunities and Challenges.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Innovative methodologies for rare diseases clinical trials.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2024
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

18 authors.

Marian MitroiuClinical Trial Methodology, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, Biostatistics and Research Support, University Medical Center Utrecht, University of Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584, CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Katrien Oude RengerinkClinical Trial Methodology, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, Biostatistics and Research Support, University Medical Center Utrecht, University of Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584, CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Caridad PontesDepartament de Farmacologia, de Terapèutica i de Toxicologia, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Unitat Docent Parc Taulí, c/ Parc Taulí 1, 08208, Sabadell, Spain. caridad.pontes@uab.cat.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3274-6048
Aranzazu SanchoDepartament de Farmacologia, de Terapèutica i de Toxicologia, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Unitat Docent Parc Taulí, c/ Parc Taulí 1, 08208, Sabadell, Spain.
Roser VivesDepartament de Farmacologia, de Terapèutica i de Toxicologia, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Unitat Docent Parc Taulí, c/ Parc Taulí 1, 08208, Sabadell, Spain.
Stella PesiouDepartament de Farmacologia, de Terapèutica i de Toxicologia, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Unitat Docent Parc Taulí, c/ Parc Taulí 1, 08208, Sabadell, Spain.
Juan Manuel FontanetDepartament de Farmacologia, de Terapèutica i de Toxicologia, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Hospital de Sant Pau, C/St Antoni Maria Claret 167, 08025, Barcelona, Spain.
Ferran TorresBiostatistics Unit, Faculty of Medicine, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, 08193 Bellaterra, Barcelona, Spain.
Stavros NikolakopoulosClinical Trial Methodology, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, Biostatistics and Research Support, University Medical Center Utrecht, University of Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584, CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Konstantinos PaterasClinical Trial Methodology, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, Biostatistics and Research Support, University Medical Center Utrecht, University of Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584, CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Gerd RosenkranzSection for Medical Statistics, Center for Medical Statistics, Informatics, and Intelligent Systems, Medical University of Vienna, Spitalgasse 23, 1090, Vienna, Austria.
Martin PoschSection for Medical Statistics, Center for Medical Statistics, Informatics, and Intelligent Systems, Medical University of Vienna, Spitalgasse 23, 1090, Vienna, Austria.
Susanne UrachSection for Medical Statistics, Center for Medical Statistics, Informatics, and Intelligent Systems, Medical University of Vienna, Spitalgasse 23, 1090, Vienna, Austria.
Robin RistlSection for Medical Statistics, Center for Medical Statistics, Informatics, and Intelligent Systems, Medical University of Vienna, Spitalgasse 23, 1090, Vienna, Austria.
Armin KochHannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Str. 1, 30625, Hannover, Germany.
Spineli LoukiaHannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Str. 1, 30625, Hannover, Germany.
Johanna H van der LeePaediatric Clinical Research Office, Woman-Child Center, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Kit C B RoesClinical Trial Methodology, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, Biostatistics and Research Support, University Medical Center Utrecht, University of Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584, CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.

Funding

FP7 Health (2009-2013) 603160
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe ASTERIX project developed a number of novel methods suited to study small populations. The objective of this exercise was to evaluate the applicability and added value of novel methods to improve drug development in small populations, using real world drug development programmes as reported in European Public Assessment Reports.

methodsThe applicability and added value of thirteen novel methods developed within ASTERIX were evaluated using data from 26 European Public Assessment Reports (EPARs) for orphan medicinal products, representative of rare medical conditions as predefined through six clusters. The novel methods included were 'innovative trial designs' (six methods), 'level of evidence' (one method), 'study endpoints and statistical analysis' (four methods), and 'meta-analysis' (two methods) and they were selected from the methods developed within ASTERIX based on their novelty; methods that discussed already available and applied strategies were not included for the purpose of this validation exercise. Pre-requisites for application in a study were systematized for each method, and for each main study in the selected EPARs it was assessed if all pre-requisites were met. This direct applicability using the actual study design was firstly assessed. Secondary, applicability and added value were explored allowing changes to study objectives and design, but without deviating from the context of the drug development plan. We evaluated whether differences in applicability and added value could be observed between the six predefined condition clusters. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Direct applicability of novel methods appeared to be limited to specific selected cases. The applicability and added value of novel methods increased substantially when changes to the study setting within the context of drug development were allowed. In this setting, novel methods for extrapolation, sample size re-assessment, multi-armed trials, optimal sequential design for small sample sizes, Bayesian sample size re-estimation, dynamic borrowing through power priors and fall-back tests for co-primary endpoints showed most promise - applicable in more than 40% of evaluated EPARs in all clusters. Most of the novel methods were applicable to conditions in the cluster of chronic and progressive conditions, involving multiple systems/organs. Relatively fewer methods were applicable to acute conditions with single episodes. For the chronic clusters, Goal Attainment Scaling was found to be particularly applicable as opposed to other (non-chronic) clusters.

conclusionNovel methods as developed in ASTERIX can improve drug development programs. Achieving optimal added value of these novel methods often requires consideration of the entire drug development program, rather than reconsideration of methods for a specific trial. The novel methods tested were mostly applicable in chronic conditions, and acute conditions with recurrent episodes.

Indexed as

Rare DiseasesBayes TheoremDrug DevelopmentHumansClinical trialsOrphanRare conditionSmall populationStatistical methods

Identifiers

PMID30419965
PMCPMC6233569

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.