Novel clinical trial designs for the development of new antiretroviral agents

Forum for Collaborative HIV Research, University of California-Berkeley, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.
AIDS (London, England) (Impact Factor: 6.56). 02/2012; 26(8):899-907. DOI: 10.1097/QAD.0b013e3283519371
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The resounding success of combination antiretroviral efficacy for both treatment-naïve and treatment-experienced patients - with 70-90% viral suppression rates in recent studies - has made registration trials for new agents challenging. With the inevitable specter of drug resistance, new agents must have a pathway to approval. The Forum for Collaborative HIV Research obtained input from concerned stakeholders including industry, clinical sciences, community advocacy, and regulatory sciences (Food and Drug Administration and European Medicines Agency) to discuss how safety and efficacy of new agents could be demonstrated. Recognizing the shortfalls of superiority or noninferiority trials in this environment, a new trial design for treatment-experienced patients, minimizing the risk for drug resistance but allowing full assessment of safety, was proposed. The antiviral efficacy of an active investigational drug would be assessed by comparison to placebo as an add-on to a failing regimen in a short, 10-14-day study followed by institution of an optimized background regimen (OBR) in both arms with investigational drug given to all patients. The follow-on stage would assess dose response, safety, durability of initial response, and development of resistance. Additionally, a second safety trial could be conducted comparing patients randomized to the investigational agent with a new OBR to those on a new OBR and placebo. Finally, approval decisions could consider other long-term safety endpoints. Exposing treatment-naïve patients to investigational agents remains a controversial issue; stakeholders have different interpretations of risk-benefit for trials in this population that necessitate careful consideration before initiating trials in them.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The therapy of HIV patients is characterized by both the high genomic diversity of the virus population harbored by the patient and a substantial volume of therapy options. The virus population is unique for each patient and time point. The large number of therapy options makes it difficult to select an optimal or near optimal therapy, especially with therapy-experienced patients. In the past decade, computer-based support for therapy selection, which assesses the level of viral resistance against drugs has become a mainstay for HIV patients. We discuss the properties of available systems and the perspectives of the field.
    Drug Discovery Today Technologies 03/2014; DOI:10.1016/j.ddtec.2014.02.004
  • AIDS (London, England) 09/2012; 26(14):1847-1848. DOI:10.1097/QAD.0b013e3283573326 · 6.56 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Since the introduction of protease inhibitors and their combination with two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors in tri-therapy, there has been a continuous improvement in the efficacy of antiretroviral treatments. Such combinations have been rendered even more effective by the introduction of non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors and, more recently, integrase inhibitors. This progress has led to a move away from superiority designs towards noninferiority designs for randomized clinical trials for HIV. Noninferiority trials aim to demonstrate that a new regimen is no worse than the current standard. The methodological issues associated with such designs have been discussed, but recent HIV trials provide us with an opportunity to consider the choice of hypotheses. Recent HIV trials have been overpowered, due to the assumption of lower success rates than observed and the enrollment of a large number of patients. The use of stratified statistical methods for primary endpoint analysis, with sample size calculated by classical methods (without stratification), also increases the statistical power. Some HIV trials have a statistical power close to 99%. Surprisingly, the results of some previous studies or phase II trials are not taken into account when designing the corresponding phase III trials. We discuss alternative hypotheses and designs.
    AIDS (London, England) 06/2014; 28(13). DOI:10.1097/QAD.0000000000000369 · 6.56 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
Jun 2, 2014