A framework for applying unfamiliar trial designs in studies of rare diseases

Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario M5B 1W8, Canada.
Journal of clinical epidemiology (Impact Factor: 5.48). 04/2011; 64(10):1085-94. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.12.019
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Rare diseases may be difficult to study through conventional research methods, but are amenable to study through certain uncommonly used designs. We sought to explain these designs and to provide a framework to assist researchers in identifying the most appropriate design for a given research question.
We systematically searched for literature describing rare disease research frameworks, trial designs, and trials that applied them. We present the advantages and disadvantages of each approach using these published examples, and a practical framework to help researchers in selecting between design choices.
When research participants are limited, researchers should consider using: 1) a crossover design; 2) n-of-1 trials; or 3) one of the following adaptive designs: a) a response-adaptive randomization design, b) a ranking and selection design, c) an internal pilot design,or d) a sequential design. Bayesian analysis may be applied to conventional designs, or to any of these uncommon designs. Several of these approaches may also be used in combination. The choice between methods should be guided by factors related to the intervention, disease,anticipated recruitment duration and success, and current state of knowledge about the treatment.
These techniques may facilitate research in rare diseases.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: People living with chronic illness often report uncertainty about the future, fear of disease progression, fear of becoming physically disabled, and a reduced life expectancy as important sources of stress. However, little is known about psychological interventions targeting these concerns. The aim of this study is to illustrate an intervention to reduce emotional distress and concerns about the future in a patient with systemic sclerosis (SSc), a rare chronic rheumatic disease with serious consequences for most patients, and to present a preliminary report on its effectiveness using a single-case study design. Because of the complexity of symptoms and complaints due to SSc, the psychological intervention was embedded in an interdisciplinary care program also consisting of physical therapy, occupational therapy, and specialized nurse care.
    Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings 10/2014; DOI:10.1007/s10880-014-9414-3 · 1.49 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Developing orphan drugs is challenging because of their severity and the requisite for effective drugs. The small number of patients does not allow conducting adequately powered randomized controlled trials (RCTs). There is a need to develop high quality, ethically investigated, and appropriately authorized medicines, without subjecting patients to unnecessary trials. The main aim is to develop generalizable framework for choosing the best-performing drug/endpoint/design combinations in orphan drug development using an in silico modeling and trial simulation approach. The two main objectives were (i) to provide a global strategy for each disease to identify the most relevant drugs to be evaluated in specific patients during phase III RCTs, (ii) and select the best design for each drug to be used in future RCTs. In silico phase III RCT simulation will be used to find the optimal trial design and was carried out in two steps: (i) statistical analysis of available clinical databases and (ii) integrative modeling that combines mathematical models for diseases with pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamics models for the selected drug candidates. There is a need to speed up the process of orphan drug development, develop new methods for translational research and personalized medicine, and contribute to European Medicines Agency guidelines. The approach presented here offers many perspectives in clinical trial conception.
    Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases 12/2014; 9(164):1-10. DOI:10.1186/s13023-014-0164-y · 3.96 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background The efficacy of thymectomy in patients with non-thymomatous Myasthenia Gravis (MG) is still unclear. Main limitations have been variable outcome definitions, lack of a control group and adjustment for confounding.Objective To study the efficacy of thymectomy in achieving remission or minimal manifestation (R/MM) status in patients with non-thymomatous MG.Methods Patients with generalized MG and minimum follow-up of 6 months were included. Demographic data and treatments were recorded, as well as the MGFA post-intervention status at the last visit. Propensity scores were used to create a matched cohort of treated and untreated patients. Standard and Bayesian Cox models were used to study treatment effects.ResultsOf 395 patients included, 183(46%) had a thymectomy. Thymectomy patients were younger (p¿<¿0.001), with more females (p¿<¿0.001) and more patients in MGFA classes 4¿5 at diagnosis (p¿=¿0.01). A matched cohort of thymectomized patients and controls (n¿=¿98) was created. The hazard ratio (HR) for the matched cohort was 1.9 (CI:1.6-2.3), favoring thymectomy. The predicted R/MM rate was 21% in treated and 6% in controls at 5 years (Absolute difference:15%). A Bayesian Cox model for the matched cohort had an estimated probability of thymectomy efficacy (HR¿>¿1) of 96% using a non-informative prior, and 79% using a skeptical prior.DiscussionWhen controlling for potential confounders, thymectomized patients had a higher probability of achieving R/MM status through time compared to controls. This study provides class III evidence of the efficacy of thymectomy in non-thymomatous myasthenia gravis.
    Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases 12/2014; 9(1):2. DOI:10.1186/s13023-014-0214-5 · 3.96 Impact Factor