Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Medical Research Methodology 1/2020

Open Access 01-12-2020 | Research article

Comparison of hierarchical EMAX and NDLM models in dose-response for early phase clinical trials

Authors: Xiaqing Huang, Byron J. Gajewski

Published in: BMC Medical Research Methodology | Issue 1/2020

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Phase II clinical trials primarily aim to find the optimal dose and investigate the relationship between dose and efficacy relative to standard of care (control). Therefore, before moving forward to a phase III confirmatory trial, the most effective dose is needed to be identified.

Methods

The primary endpoint of a phase II trial is typically a binary endpoint of success or failure. The EMAX model, ubiquitous in pharmacology research, was fit for many compounds and described the data well, except for a single compound, which had nonmonotone dose–response (Thomas et al., Stat Biopharmaceutical Res. 6:302-317 2014). To mitigate the risk of nonmonotone dose response one of the alternative options is a Bayesian hierarchical EMAX model (Gajewski et al., Stat Med. 38:3123-3138 2019). The hierarchical EMAX adapts to its environment.

Results

When the dose-response curve is monotonic it enjoys the efficiency of EMAX. When the dose-response curve is non-monotonic the additional random effect hyperprior makes the hierarchical EMAX model more adjustable and flexible. However, the normal dynamic linear model (NDLM) is a useful model to explore dose-response relationships in that the efficacy at the current dose depends on the efficacy of the previous dose(s). Previous research has compared the EMAX to the hierarchical EMAX (Gajewski et al., Stat Med. 38:3123-3138 2019) and the EMAX to the NDLM (Liu et al., BMC Med Res Method 17:149 2017), however, the hierarchical EMAX has not been directly compared to the NDLM.

Conclusions

The focus of this paper is to compare these models and discuss the relative merit for each of their uses for an ongoing early phase dose selection study.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Bornkamp B, Pinheiro J, Bretz F. MCPMod: an R package for the design and analysis of dose-finding studies. J Stat Softw. 2009;29(7).. Bornkamp B, Pinheiro J, Bretz F. MCPMod: an R package for the design and analysis of dose-finding studies. J Stat Softw. 2009;29(7)..
2.
go back to reference Bretz F, Pinheiro JC, Branson M. Combining multiple comparisons and modeling techniques in dose-response studies. Biometrics. 2005;6:738–48.CrossRef Bretz F, Pinheiro JC, Branson M. Combining multiple comparisons and modeling techniques in dose-response studies. Biometrics. 2005;6:738–48.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Berry SM, Carlin BP, Lee JJ, Muller P. Bayesian Adaptive Methods for Clinical Trials. New York: CRC Press; 2011. Berry SM, Carlin BP, Lee JJ, Muller P. Bayesian Adaptive Methods for Clinical Trials. New York: CRC Press; 2011.
4.
go back to reference Gajewski B, Meinzer C, Berry S, Rockswold G, Barsan W, Korley F, Martin R. Bayesian hierarchical EMAX model for dose response in early phase efficacy clinical trials. Stat Med. 2019;38(17):3123–38.PubMedCrossRef Gajewski B, Meinzer C, Berry S, Rockswold G, Barsan W, Korley F, Martin R. Bayesian hierarchical EMAX model for dose response in early phase efficacy clinical trials. Stat Med. 2019;38(17):3123–38.PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference Thomas N, Sweeney K, Somayaji V. Meta-analysis of clinical dose–response in a large drug development portfolio. Stat Biopharmaceutical Res. 2014;6(4):302–17.CrossRef Thomas N, Sweeney K, Somayaji V. Meta-analysis of clinical dose–response in a large drug development portfolio. Stat Biopharmaceutical Res. 2014;6(4):302–17.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Basu C, Ahmed MA, Kartha RV, Brundage RC, Raymond GV, Cloyd JC, Carlin BP. A hierarchical Bayesian approach for combining pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic modeling and phase IIa trial design in orphan drugs: treating adrenoleukodystrophy with Lorenzo’s oil. J Biopharm Stat. 2016;16(6):1025–39.CrossRef Basu C, Ahmed MA, Kartha RV, Brundage RC, Raymond GV, Cloyd JC, Carlin BP. A hierarchical Bayesian approach for combining pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic modeling and phase IIa trial design in orphan drugs: treating adrenoleukodystrophy with Lorenzo’s oil. J Biopharm Stat. 2016;16(6):1025–39.CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Liu F, Walter S, Julious S. Design consideration and analysis planning of a phase2a proof of concept study in rheumatoid arthritis in the presence of possible non-monotonicity. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2017;17:149.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Liu F, Walter S, Julious S. Design consideration and analysis planning of a phase2a proof of concept study in rheumatoid arthritis in the presence of possible non-monotonicity. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2017;17:149.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Grieve A, Krams M. ASTIN: a Bayesian adaptive dose-response trial in acute stroke. Clin Trials. 2005;2:340–51.PubMedCrossRef Grieve A, Krams M. ASTIN: a Bayesian adaptive dose-response trial in acute stroke. Clin Trials. 2005;2:340–51.PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Viele K, Broglio K, McGlothlin A, Saville B. Comparison of methods for control allocation in multiple arm studies using response adaptive randomization. Clin Trials. 2019;17(1):52–60.PubMedCrossRef Viele K, Broglio K, McGlothlin A, Saville B. Comparison of methods for control allocation in multiple arm studies using response adaptive randomization. Clin Trials. 2019;17(1):52–60.PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Comparison of hierarchical EMAX and NDLM models in dose-response for early phase clinical trials
Authors
Xiaqing Huang
Byron J. Gajewski
Publication date
01-12-2020
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology / Issue 1/2020
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2288
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-020-01071-2

Other articles of this Issue 1/2020

BMC Medical Research Methodology 1/2020 Go to the issue