Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Trials 1/2018

Open Access 01-12-2018 | Study protocol

Considerations for adaptive design in pediatric clinical trials: study protocol for a systematic review, mixed-methods study, and integrated knowledge translation plan

Authors: Lauren E Kelly, Michele P Dyson, Nancy J Butcher, Robert Balshaw, Alex John London, Christine J Neilson, Anne Junker, Salaheddin M Mahmud, S Michelle Driedger, Xikui Wang

Published in: Trials | Issue 1/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Although children have historically been excluded from clinical trials (CTs), many require medicines tested and approved in CTs, forcing health care providers to treat their pediatric patients based on extrapolated data. Unfortunately, traditional randomized CTs can be slow and resource-intensive, and they often require multi-center collaboration. However, an adaptive design (AD) framework for CTs could be used to increase the efficiency of pediatric CTs by incorporating prospectively planned modifications to CT methods without undermining the integrity or validity of the study. There are many possible adaptations, but each will have ethical, logistical, and statistical implications. It remains unclear which adaptations (or combinations thereof) will lead to real-world improvements in pediatric CT efficiency. This study will identify, evaluate, and synthesize the various regulatory, ethical, logistical, and statistical considerations and emerging issues of AD in CTs that could be used to evaluate the use of drugs in children.

Methods/design

Following the development of a peer-reviewed search strategy, a systematic review on AD in CTs will be conducted. Data on regulatory, ethical, logistic, and statistical considerations as well as population and trial design characteristics will be synthesized. A mixed-methods study including surveys and focus groups with regulators, research ethics board members, biostatisticians, clinicians, and scientists, as well as representatives from patient groups and the public will evaluate the opportunities and challenges in applying AD in trials enrolling children and propose recommendations on best practices.

Discussion

This study will deliver practical recommendations on the use of AD in pediatric CTs. Collaboration and consultation with national and global partners will ensure that our results meet the needs of researchers, regulators, and patients, both locally and globally, and that they remain current and relevant by engaging a wide variety of stakeholders. Overall, this research will enrich the knowledge base regarding if, how, and when AD can be used to answer research questions with fewer resources while still meeting the highest ethical standards and regulatory requirements for CTs. In turn, this will result in increased high-quality clinical research needed by health care providers so they have access to appropriate, population-specific evidence regarding the safe and effective use of medicines in children.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
2.
go back to reference Kearns GL, Abdel-Rahman SM, Alander SW, et al. Developmental pharmacology—drug disposition, action, and therapy in infants and children. N Engl J Med. 2003;349(12):1157–67.CrossRef Kearns GL, Abdel-Rahman SM, Alander SW, et al. Developmental pharmacology—drug disposition, action, and therapy in infants and children. N Engl J Med. 2003;349(12):1157–67.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Leeder JS, Kearns GL, Spielberg SP, et al. Understanding the relative roles of pharmacogenetics and ontogeny in pediatric drug development and regulatory science. J Clin Pharmacol. 2010;50(12):1377–87.CrossRef Leeder JS, Kearns GL, Spielberg SP, et al. Understanding the relative roles of pharmacogenetics and ontogeny in pediatric drug development and regulatory science. J Clin Pharmacol. 2010;50(12):1377–87.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Tayman C, Rayyan M, Allegaert K. Neonatal pharmacology: extensive interindividual variability despite limited size. J Pediatr Pharmacol Ther. 2011;16(3):170–84.PubMedPubMedCentral Tayman C, Rayyan M, Allegaert K. Neonatal pharmacology: extensive interindividual variability despite limited size. J Pediatr Pharmacol Ther. 2011;16(3):170–84.PubMedPubMedCentral
5.
go back to reference Yaffe SJ, Aranda JV. Neonatal and pediatric pharmacology: therapeutic principles in practice. Baltimore: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2010. Yaffe SJ, Aranda JV. Neonatal and pediatric pharmacology: therapeutic principles in practice. Baltimore: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2010.
6.
go back to reference Bazzano AT, Mangione-Smith R, Schonlau M, et al. Off-label prescribing to children in the United States outpatient setting. Acad Pediatr. 2009;9(2):81–8.CrossRef Bazzano AT, Mangione-Smith R, Schonlau M, et al. Off-label prescribing to children in the United States outpatient setting. Acad Pediatr. 2009;9(2):81–8.CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Shah SS, Hall M, Goodman DM, et al. Off-label drug use in hospitalized children. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2007;161(3):282–90.CrossRef Shah SS, Hall M, Goodman DM, et al. Off-label drug use in hospitalized children. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2007;161(3):282–90.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Kairalla JA, Coffey CS, Thomann MA, et al. Adaptive trial designs: a review of barriers and opportunities. Trials. 2012;13(1):145.CrossRef Kairalla JA, Coffey CS, Thomann MA, et al. Adaptive trial designs: a review of barriers and opportunities. Trials. 2012;13(1):145.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Van der Lee J, Wesseling J, Tanck M, et al. Efficient ways exist to obtain the optimal sample size in clinical trials in rare diseases. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008;61(4):324–30.CrossRef Van der Lee J, Wesseling J, Tanck M, et al. Efficient ways exist to obtain the optimal sample size in clinical trials in rare diseases. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008;61(4):324–30.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Bretz F, Koenig F, Brannath W, et al. Adaptive designs for confirmatory clinical trials. Stat Med. 2009;28(8):1181–217.CrossRef Bretz F, Koenig F, Brannath W, et al. Adaptive designs for confirmatory clinical trials. Stat Med. 2009;28(8):1181–217.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Chow S-C, Chang M. Adaptive design methods in clinical trials—a review. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2008;3(1):11.CrossRef Chow S-C, Chang M. Adaptive design methods in clinical trials—a review. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2008;3(1):11.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference van der Lee JH, Wesseling J, Tanck MW, et al. Sequential design with boundaries approach in pediatric intervention research reduces sample size. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010;63(1):19–27.CrossRef van der Lee JH, Wesseling J, Tanck MW, et al. Sequential design with boundaries approach in pediatric intervention research reduces sample size. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010;63(1):19–27.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Hey SP, Kimmelman J. Are outcome-adaptive allocation trials ethical? Clin Trials. 2015;12(2):102–6.CrossRef Hey SP, Kimmelman J. Are outcome-adaptive allocation trials ethical? Clin Trials. 2015;12(2):102–6.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Bauer P, König F. Adaptive paediatric investigation plans, a small step to improve regulatory decision making in drug development for children? Pharm Stat. 2016;15(5):384–6.CrossRef Bauer P, König F. Adaptive paediatric investigation plans, a small step to improve regulatory decision making in drug development for children? Pharm Stat. 2016;15(5):384–6.CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Hung H, O'neill RT, Wang SJ, et al. A regulatory view on adaptive/flexible clinical trial design. Biom J. 2006;48(4):565–73.CrossRef Hung H, O'neill RT, Wang SJ, et al. A regulatory view on adaptive/flexible clinical trial design. Biom J. 2006;48(4):565–73.CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Armitage P. Sequential methods in clinical trials. Am J Public Health Nations Health. 1958;48(10):1395–402.CrossRef Armitage P. Sequential methods in clinical trials. Am J Public Health Nations Health. 1958;48(10):1395–402.CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Wadsworth I, Hampson LV, Jaki T. Extrapolation of efficacy and other data to support the development of new medicines for children: a systematic review of methods. Stat Methods Med Res. 2018;27(2):398–413.CrossRef Wadsworth I, Hampson LV, Jaki T. Extrapolation of efficacy and other data to support the development of new medicines for children: a systematic review of methods. Stat Methods Med Res. 2018;27(2):398–413.CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Baud O, Maury L, Lebail F, et al. Effect of early low-dose hydrocortisone on survival without bronchopulmonary dysplasia in extremely preterm infants (PREMILOC): a double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre, randomised trial. Lancet. 2016;387(10030):1827–36.CrossRef Baud O, Maury L, Lebail F, et al. Effect of early low-dose hydrocortisone on survival without bronchopulmonary dysplasia in extremely preterm infants (PREMILOC): a double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre, randomised trial. Lancet. 2016;387(10030):1827–36.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Hatfield I, Allison A, Flight L, et al. Adaptive designs undertaken in clinical research: a review of registered clinical trials. Trials. 2016;17(1):150.CrossRef Hatfield I, Allison A, Flight L, et al. Adaptive designs undertaken in clinical research: a review of registered clinical trials. Trials. 2016;17(1):150.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Graham ID, Tetroe J. CIHR research: how to translate health research knowledge into effective healthcare action. Healthc Q. 2007;10(3):20–2.CrossRef Graham ID, Tetroe J. CIHR research: how to translate health research knowledge into effective healthcare action. Healthc Q. 2007;10(3):20–2.CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Moher D, Shamseer L, Clarke M, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst Rev. 2015;4(1):1.CrossRef Moher D, Shamseer L, Clarke M, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst Rev. 2015;4(1):1.CrossRef
23.
go back to reference McGowan J, Sampson M, Salzwedel DM, et al. PRESS peer review of electronic search strategies: 2015 guideline statement. J Clin Epidemiol. 2016;75:40–6.CrossRef McGowan J, Sampson M, Salzwedel DM, et al. PRESS peer review of electronic search strategies: 2015 guideline statement. J Clin Epidemiol. 2016;75:40–6.CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, et al. Research electronic data capture (REDCap)—a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform. 2009;42(2):377–81.CrossRef Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, et al. Research electronic data capture (REDCap)—a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform. 2009;42(2):377–81.CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Higgins JP, Altman DG, Gøtzsche PC, et al. The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ. 2011;343:d5928.CrossRef Higgins JP, Altman DG, Gøtzsche PC, et al. The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ. 2011;343:d5928.CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Patton MQ. Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications; 1990. Patton MQ. Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications; 1990.
27.
go back to reference Krueger RA, Casey MA. Focus groups: a practical guide for applied research. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications; 2014. Krueger RA, Casey MA. Focus groups: a practical guide for applied research. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications; 2014.
28.
go back to reference Bazeley P, Jackson K. Qualitative data analysis with NVivo. 2nd ed. London: Sage Publications; 2013. Bazeley P, Jackson K. Qualitative data analysis with NVivo. 2nd ed. London: Sage Publications; 2013.
29.
go back to reference Strauss A, Corbin J. Basics of qualitative research: procedures and techniques for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications; 1998. Strauss A, Corbin J. Basics of qualitative research: procedures and techniques for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications; 1998.
30.
go back to reference Richards L. Handling qualitative data: a practical guide. 3rd ed. Los Angeles: Sage Publications; 2014. Richards L. Handling qualitative data: a practical guide. 3rd ed. Los Angeles: Sage Publications; 2014.
31.
go back to reference Miles M, Huberman A. Early steps in analysis. In: Qualitative data analysis: an expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications; 1994. p. 50–89. Miles M, Huberman A. Early steps in analysis. In: Qualitative data analysis: an expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications; 1994. p. 50–89.
32.
go back to reference O’Brien BC, Harris IB, Beckman TJ, et al. Standards for reporting qualitative research: a synthesis of recommendations. Acad Med. 2014;89(9):1245–51.CrossRef O’Brien BC, Harris IB, Beckman TJ, et al. Standards for reporting qualitative research: a synthesis of recommendations. Acad Med. 2014;89(9):1245–51.CrossRef
33.
go back to reference Spencer L, Ritchie J, Lewis J, et al. Quality in qualitative evaluation: a framework for assessing research evidence. London: National Centre for Social Research; 2003. Spencer L, Ritchie J, Lewis J, et al. Quality in qualitative evaluation: a framework for assessing research evidence. London: National Centre for Social Research; 2003.
34.
go back to reference Baxter J, Eyles J. Evaluating qualitative research in social geography: establishing ‘rigour’in interview analysis. Trans Inst Br Geogr. 1997;22(4):505–25.CrossRef Baxter J, Eyles J. Evaluating qualitative research in social geography: establishing ‘rigour’in interview analysis. Trans Inst Br Geogr. 1997;22(4):505–25.CrossRef
35.
go back to reference Bonilla C, Lawlor DA, Taylor AE, et al. Vitamin B-12 status during pregnancy and child's IQ at age 8: a Mendelian randomization study in the Avon longitudinal study of parents and children. PLOS One. 2012;7(12):e51084.CrossRef Bonilla C, Lawlor DA, Taylor AE, et al. Vitamin B-12 status during pregnancy and child's IQ at age 8: a Mendelian randomization study in the Avon longitudinal study of parents and children. PLOS One. 2012;7(12):e51084.CrossRef
36.
go back to reference Shaddy RE, Denne SC. Clinical report—guidelines for the ethical conduct of studies to evaluate drugs in pediatric populations. Pediatrics. 2010;125:850–60.CrossRef Shaddy RE, Denne SC. Clinical report—guidelines for the ethical conduct of studies to evaluate drugs in pediatric populations. Pediatrics. 2010;125:850–60.CrossRef
37.
go back to reference Derivan AT, Leventhal BL, March J, et al. The ethical use of placebo in clinical trials involving children. J Child Adolesc Psychopharmacol. 2004;14(2):169–74.CrossRef Derivan AT, Leventhal BL, March J, et al. The ethical use of placebo in clinical trials involving children. J Child Adolesc Psychopharmacol. 2004;14(2):169–74.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Considerations for adaptive design in pediatric clinical trials: study protocol for a systematic review, mixed-methods study, and integrated knowledge translation plan
Authors
Lauren E Kelly
Michele P Dyson
Nancy J Butcher
Robert Balshaw
Alex John London
Christine J Neilson
Anne Junker
Salaheddin M Mahmud
S Michelle Driedger
Xikui Wang
Publication date
01-12-2018
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Trials / Issue 1/2018
Electronic ISSN: 1745-6215
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-018-2934-7

Other articles of this Issue 1/2018

Trials 1/2018 Go to the issue