Abstract
Multiregional clinical trials (MRCTs) present great opportunities but also challenges to the trial community. To address the challenges and fully realize the opportunities, a PhRMA MRCT Cross-Functional Key Issue Team (KIT) was formed in 2008. One of the work streams within the KIT particularly focuses on the assessment of consistency of treatment effects across regions. As the main objective of this work stream, this research explores a number of definitions for consistency assessments. We address the issues primarily for superiority trials with continuous endpoints, then extend briefly to noninferiority trials, random effect models, binary endpoints, and survival endpoints. Computations and simulations are used to study the properties of the proposed definitions, particularly the power for showing consistency. To illustrate applications of the methods, we use a trial example with a continuous endpoint. We discuss considerations for trial design as well as for data analysis. The consistency assessment relies heavily on the definition of regions and the number of regions. We recommend working with health authorities to define region in a manner that is sensible from a practical interpretation standpoint and also makes region consistency assessment a feasible undertaking.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
JCH. International Conference on Harmonization Tripartite Guidance E5. Ethnic factor in the acceptability of foreign data. Federal Register, 1998;83:31790–31796.
Shih WJ. Clinical trials for drug registrations in Asian-Pacific countries: proposal for a new paradigm from a statistical perspective. Control Clin Trials. 2001;22:357–366.
Chow SC, Shao J. Hu OYP. Assessing sensitivity and similarity in bridging studies. J Biopharm Stat. 2002;12:385–400.
Liu JP, Chow SC. Bridging studies in clinical development. J Biopharm Stat. 2002;12: 359–367.
Hsiao CF, Xu JZ, Liu JP. A group sequential approach to evaluation of bridging studies. J Biopharm Stat 2003;13:793–801.
Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare of Japan. Basic concepts for joint international clinical trials. September 28, 2007.
European Medicines Agency. Reflection paper on the extrapolation of results from clinical studies conducted outside Europe to the EU-population (draft). EMEA Doc. Ref. CHMP/EWP/692702/2008. February 2009. https://doi.org/www.emea.europa.eu/pdfs/human/ewp/69270208en.pdf.
Quan H, Zhao PL, Zhang J, Roessner M, Aizawa K. Sample size considerations for Japanese patients in a multi-regional trial based on MHLW guidance. Pharm Stat 2009; early view, https://doi.org/www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/122432408/PDFSTART.
Kawai N, Chuang-Stein C, Komiyama O, Li Y. An approach to rationalize partitioning sample size into individual regions in a multiregional trial. Drug Inf J. 2007;42:139–147.
Quan H, Li M, Chen J, et al. Assessment of consistency of treatment effects in multi-regional clinical trials. Sanofi-Aventis Tech Report #034, September 2009.
Hung HMJ. Design considerations for bridging clinical trials and global clinical trials. Presented at DIA Annual Meeting, Atlanta, GA, June 20, 2007.
Schoenfeld D. The asymptotic properties of non-parametric tests for comparing survival distributions. Biometrika. 1981;68:316–319.
Pan G, Wolfe DA. Test for qualitative interaction of clinical significance. Stat Med. 1997;16:1645–1652.
Gail M, Simon R. Testing for qualitative interaction between treatment effects and patient subsets. Biometrics. 1985;41:361–372.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Quan, H., Li, M., Chen, J. et al. Assessment of Consistency of Treatment Effects in Multiregional Clinical Trials. Ther Innov Regul Sci 44, 617–632 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1177/009286151004400509
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/009286151004400509