Comparison of treatment effect between phase 2 and phase 3 trials in patients with inflammatory bowel disease

Author:

Wils Pauline12,Jairath Vipul3,Sands Bruce E.4,Magro Fernando5,Reinisch Walter6,Rubin David7ORCID,Danese Silvio8,Baumann Cédric9,Peyrin‐Biroulet Laurent1011ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Gastroenterology Claude Huriez Hospital University of Lille 2 Lille France

2. Inserm CHU Lille U1286‐ INFINITE‐ Institute for Translational Research in Inflammation University of Lille Lille France

3. Division of Gastroenterology Department of Medicine Western University London Ontario Canada

4. The Dr Henry J Janowitz Division of Gastroenterology Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai New York New York USA

5. Department of Gastroenterology Centro Hospitalar São João Porto Portugal

6. Division Gastroenterology and Hepatology Department of Internal Medicine III Medical University of Vienna Vienna Austria

7. Inflammatory Bowel Disease Center University of Chicago Medicine Chicago Illinois USA

8. Gastroenterology and Endoscopy IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele and Vita‐Salute San Raffaele University Milan Italy

9. Unit of Methodology, Data Management and Statistic Nancy University Hospital Nancy France

10. Department of Gastroenterology CHRU‐Nancy University of Lorraine Nancy France

11. Inserm NGERE University of Lorraine Nancy France

Abstract

AbstractBackground and AimsThe accumulation of multiple randomized controlled trials in the field of inflammatory bowel diseases provides an opportunity to compare treatment effects between phase 2 and 3 trials. We aimed to determine whether treatment effects observed in phase 3 investigating biologics and small molecule drugs differed from those in their preceding phase 2 trial.MethodsWe first performed a review of phase 2 and phase 3 trials enrolling ulcerative colitis (UC) or Crohn's disease (CD) patients. We compared the percent overall success for key endpoints between phases (several phase 3 could be matched to a single phase 2 trial). Then, we compared the percent overall success in the matched phase 2 and 3 trials (ratio 1:1), and performed sensitivity analysis.ResultsWe identified 14 phase 2 (8 CD; 6 UC) and 24 phase 3 (13 CD; 11 UC) trials. In CD, the different analyses suggest that the percentage of overall success of clinical remission and clinical response was significantly higher in phase 2 than in phase 3 trials. In UC, the analyses suggest collectively that the percent of treatment effect seemed similar for clinical remission, clinical response and histologic outcomes between phases but with a lower percentage of overall success in phase 2 than in phase 3 trials for endoscopic endpoints.ConclusionsIn UC, we observed a similar percentage of treatment effect for clinical and histologic outcomes between phase 2 and 3 trials but not for endoscopic outcomes. Whereas in CD, we showed a failure to reproduce similar results between phases. These results may help sponsors in the design of future drug development programs.

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Gastroenterology,Oncology

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3