ArticleThe AAPS journal2020
Application of Trial Simulation in the Design of a Prospective Study for Concentration-QTc Analysis in Support of a Thorough QT Study Waiver.
Article in The AAPS journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Exposure-response analysis of adverse events associated with molibresib and its active metabolites in patients with solid tumors.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The concentration-QTc (C-QTc) analysis is often applied in the first-in-human (FIH) study to demonstrate the absence of a QTc effect in support of a TQT waiver. However, a C-QTc analysis without properly designed sensitivity could fail to conclude the absence of a QTc effect at high concentrations, even though the compound is QTc negative. This is because the 90% confidence interval (CI) of the model-derived ∆∆QTc grows wider with increasing concentration, and the upper-bound could cross the 10-ms threshold, even though the slope is close to 0. So far, there is no simple math formula to calculate the sensitivity/specificity of a C-QTc analysis. A PK/QTc trial simulation scheme was applied to optimize the design features of a C-QTc trial in FIH studies by evaluating the study's sensitivity over a wide concentration range, circumventing the problem of not knowing the target concentration during FIH studies. It was also used to ensure that the specificity of the trial was well-controlled. Simulation showed that the study sensitivity can be quantitatively gauged by optimizing the dose range, the number of samples per subjects or subject number, and by sampling around Tmax, and at steady-state. The specificity of the trial can also be evaluated with this approach, and it is important to combine model-derived ∆∆QTc and slope estimate in the evaluation. The trial simulation approach helps maximize the probability of success of C-QTc analyses in FIH studies intended to support a TQT waiver.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32743691What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.