Innovative approaches to clinical development and trial design.

Pharmaceutical innovation is increasingly risky, costly and at times inefficient, which has led to a decline in industry productivity. Despite the increased investment in R&D by the industry, the number of new molecular entities achieving marketing authorization is not increasing. Novel approaches to clinical development and trial design could have a key role in overcoming some of these challenges by improving efficiency and reducing attrition rates. The effectiveness of clinical development can be improved by adopting a more integrated model that increases flexibility and maximizes the use of accumulated knowledge. Central to this model of drug development are novel tools, including modelling and simulation, Bayesian methodologies, and adaptive designs, such as seamless adaptive designs and sample-size re-estimation methods. Applications of these methodologies to early- and late-stage drug development are described with some specific examples, along with advantages, challenges, and barriers to implementation. Because they are so flexible, these new trial designs require significant statistical analyses, simulations and logistical considerations to verify their operating characteristics, and therefore tend to require more time for the planning and protocol development phase. Greater awareness of the distinct advantages of innovative designs by regulators and sponsors are crucial to increasing the adoption of these modern tools.

Zoledronic acid and clinical fractures and mortality after hip fracture.

BACKGROUND: Mortality is increased after a hip fracture, and strategies that improve outcomes are needed. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, 1065 patients were assigned to receive yearly intravenous zoledronic acid (at a dose of 5 mg), and 1062 patients were assigned to receive placebo. The infusions were first administered within 90 days after surgical repair of a hip fracture. All patients (mean age, 74.5 years) received supplemental vitamin D and calcium. The median follow-up was 1.9 years. The primary end point was a new clinical fracture. RESULTS: The rates of any new clinical fracture were 8.6% in the zoledronic acid group and 13.9% in the placebo group, a 35% risk reduction with zoledronic acid (P=0.001); the respective rates of a new clinical vertebral fracture were 1.7% and 3.8% (P=0.02), and the respective rates of new nonvertebral fractures were 7.6% and 10.7% (P=0.03). In the safety analysis, 101 of 1054 patients in the zoledronic acid group (9.6%) and 141 of 1057 patients in the placebo group (13.3%) died, a reduction of 28% in deaths from any cause in the zoledronic acid group (P=0.01). The most frequent adverse events in patients receiving zoledronic acid were pyrexia, myalgia, and bone and musculoskeletal pain. No cases of osteonecrosis of the jaw were reported, and no adverse effects on the healing of fractures were noted. The rates of renal and cardiovascular adverse events, including atrial fibrillation and stroke, were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: An annual infusion of zoledronic acid within 90 days after repair of a low-trauma hip fracture was associated with a reduction in the rate of new clinical fractures and with improved survival. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00046254 [ClinicalTrials.gov].).

Recommendations for the registration of agents to be used in the prevention and treatment of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis: updated recommendations from the Group for the Respect of Ethics and Excellence in Science.

OBJECTIVES: The Group for the Respect and Excellence in Science (GREES) has reviewed and updated their recommendations for clinical trials to evaluate the efficacy and safety of new chemical entities to be used in the treatment and prevention of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis (GIOP). METHODS: Consensus discussion of the committee. RESULTS: With the exception of steroid use posttransplantation, there is no need to differentiate between underlying diseases. Prevention and treatment for GIOP are dependent on exposure to glucocorticoids rather than T-scores as in postmenopausal osteoporosis (PMO). If fracture data are obtained for PMO, it need not be repeated for GIOP, relying instead on bone mineral density (BMD) trials of at least 1 year. GREES recommends several changes in the previous guidance for GIOP. The committee saw no need to repeat preclinical studies if those have been previously done to assure bone quality in PMO. Similarly, phase I and phase II trials, if careful dose selection has been done for PMO, should not be repeated. The "prevention" and "treatment" claims should remain. Since the most recent evidence suggests significant increase in fracture risk for daily doses of prednisone of 5 mg/day or equivalent, clinical trials should concentrate on patients receiving at least this daily dosage. The emergence of bisphosphonates as the reference treatment, together with the rapid bone loss and high fracture incidence in glucocorticoid users, necessitates recommending a noninferiority trial design with lumbar spine BMD as the primary endpoint after 1 year. CONCLUSIONS: Registration of new chemical entities to be used in the management of GIOP should be granted, based on a 1-year noninferiority trial, using BMD as primary outcome and alendronate or risedronate as comparator. Demonstration of antifracture efficacy should have been previously demonstrated in PMO.

Prevention of acute ischemic renal failure by targeted delivery of growth factors to the proximal tubule in transgenic mice: the efficacy of parathyroid hormone-related protein and hepatocyte growth factor.

Treatment of acute renal failure (ARF) would be enhanced by identification of factors that accelerate renal recovery from injury. Parathyroid hormone-related protein (PTHrP) and hepatocyte growth factor (HGF) have been shown to stimulate proliferation in proximal nephron-derived cells. For studying the pathophysiologic roles and therapeutic potential of these two factors in ARF, transgenic mice overexpressing PTHrP or HGF in the proximal tubule under the direction of the gamma-glutamyl transpeptidase-I promoter were developed. These mice display (1) abundant expression of the respective transgenes in the kidney; (2) similar PTH type I receptor and HGF receptor (c-met) expression levels in the proximal tubule compared with control littermates; and (3) normal renal morphology, function, and tubule cell proliferation under basal conditions. However, in contrast to control mice, when acute ischemic renal injury was induced, renal function rapidly and dramatically recovered in HGF-overexpressing mice. In addition, 48 h after ischemia, HGF-overexpressing transgenic mice displayed a fourfold increase in tubule cell proliferation and a threefold decrease in apoptotic tubule cell death compared with control mice. In contrast, PTHrP-overexpressing mice responded to either ischemic or folic acid-induced renal damage similarly to control mice. These studies demonstrate that overexpression of PTHrP in the proximal nephron of mice does not seem to provide protection against acute renal injury. In marked contrast, HGF overexpression results in dramatic protection from ischemia-induced ARF, without inducing any apparent alteration in the physiology of the kidney under normal conditions. These studies suggest that HGF, when targeted specifically to the proximal tubule, may have therapeutic potential in providing protection against ischemia-induced renal failure.

Therapeutic equivalence of alendronate 35 milligrams once weekly and 5 milligrams daily in the prevention of postmenopausal osteoporosis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of alendronate 35 mg once weekly compared with alendronate 5 mg daily in the prevention of osteoporosis. METHODS: We compared the efficacy and safety of treatment with alendronate 35 mg once weekly (n = 362) and alendronate 5 mg daily (n = 361) in a 1-year, double-blind, multicenter study of postmenopausal women (6 months or greater), aged 40-70 years, with lumbar spine and femoral neck bone mineral density T-scores between -2.5 and 1. The primary efficacy end point was the comparability of lumbar spine bone mineral density increases, defined by strict prespecified criteria. RESULTS: Mean increases in lumbar spine bone mineral density at 12 months were equivalent (difference between the alendronate 35-mg once-weekly group and the alendronate 5-mg daily group [90% confidence interval] at month 12 was -0.3% [-0.6, 0.1], well within the prespecified bounds of +/-1.0%). Bone mineral density increases at other skeletal sites and effects on bone turnover were also virtually identical for the two dosing regimens. Both treatment regimens were well tolerated, and the larger weekly unit dose was not associated with an increased frequency of upper gastrointestinal events. CONCLUSION: Alendronate 35 mg once weekly is therapeutically equivalent to alendronate 5 mg daily and provides patients with greater dosing convenience, in addition to the proven efficacy of alendronate and good tolerability.