Considerations in the Evaluation of Surrogate Endpoints in Clinical Trials

作者: Victor G De Gruttola , Pamela Clax , David L DeMets , Gregory J Downing , Susan S Ellenberg

DOI: 10.1016/S0197-2456(01)00153-2

关键词:

摘要: We report on recommendations from a National Institutes of Health Workshop methods for evaluating the use surrogate endpoints in clinical trials, which was attended by experts biostatistics and trials broad array disease areas. Recent advances biosciences technology have increased ability to understand, measure, model biological mechanisms; appropriate application these research settings requires collaboration quantitative laboratory scientists. Biomarkers, new examples arise rapidly technologies, are used frequently such areas as early detection identification patients most likely benefit therapies. There is also scientific interest exploring whether, under what conditions, biomarkers may substitute phase III although workshop participants agreed that considerations apply primarily situations where using not feasible. Evaluating candidate exploratory phases drug development investigating confirmatory require establishment statistical inferential framework. As first step, reviewed degree can explain or predict effect treatments measured trials. They suggested approaches reflect only indirectly important processes causal path biomarker measurement errors concern. Participants emphasized need further models, whether they empirical nature attempt describe mechanisms mathematical terms. Of special were meta-analytic models combining information multiple studies involving interventions same condition. Recommendations included design conduct assemblage databases needed research. Finally, there strong recommendation training scientists biologic well modeling ensure will be an adequate workforce meet future needs.

参考文章(19)
A. S. Perelson, A. U. Neumann, M. Markowitz, J. M. Leonard, D. D. Ho, HIV-1 Dynamics in Vivo: Virion Clearance Rate, Infected Cell Life-Span, and Viral Generation Time Science. ,vol. 271, pp. 1582- 1586 ,(1996) , 10.1126/SCIENCE.271.5255.1582
V. De Gruttola, T. Fleming, D. Y. Lin, R. Coombs, Perspective: Validating Surrogate Markers—Are We Being Naive? The Journal of Infectious Diseases. ,vol. 175, pp. 237- 246 ,(1997) , 10.1093/INFDIS/175.2.237
A.Adam Ding, Hulin Wu, Relationships between antiviral treatment effects and biphasic viral decay rates in modeling HIV dynamics Bellman Prize in Mathematical Biosciences. ,vol. 160, pp. 63- 82 ,(1999) , 10.1016/S0025-5564(99)00021-8
Alan S. Perelson, Paulina Essunger, Yunzhen Cao, Mika Vesanen, Arlene Hurley, Kalle Saksela, Martin Markowitz, David D. Ho, Decay characteristics of HIV-1-infected compartments during combination therapy Nature. ,vol. 387, pp. 188- 191 ,(1997) , 10.1038/387188A0
A. A. Tsiatis, Victor Degruttola, M. S. Wulfsohn, Modeling the Relationship of Survival to Longitudinal Data Measured with Error. Applications to Survival and CD4 Counts in Patients with AIDS Journal of the American Statistical Association. ,vol. 90, pp. 27- 37 ,(1995) , 10.1080/01621459.1995.10476485
S. S. Ellenberg, Surrogate end points in clinical trials. BMJ. ,vol. 302, pp. 63- 64 ,(1991) , 10.1136/BMJ.302.6768.63
Michael J. Daniels, Michael D. Hughes, Meta-analysis for the evaluation of potential surrogate markers Statistics in Medicine. ,vol. 16, pp. 1965- 1982 ,(1997) , 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19970915)16:17<1965::AID-SIM630>3.0.CO;2-M
Thomas R. Fleming, Surrogate End Points in Clinical Trials: Are We Being Misled? Annals of Internal Medicine. ,vol. 125, pp. 605- 613 ,(1996) , 10.7326/0003-4819-125-7-199610010-00011
Thomas R. Fleming, Ross L. Prentice, Margaret S. Pepe, David Glidden, Surrogate and auxiliary endpoints in clinical trials, with potential applications in cancer and aids research Statistics in Medicine. ,vol. 13, pp. 955- 968 ,(1994) , 10.1002/SIM.4780130906