Search

OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy of a zoster vaccine on herpes zoster (HR)-related interference with activities of daily living (ADLs) and health-related quality of life (HRQL). DESIGN: Randomized double-blind placebo controlled trial. SETTING: Twenty-two U.S. sites. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty eight thousand five hundred forty-six women and men aged 60 and olcer. MEASUREMENTS: HZ burden of interference with ADLs and HRQL using ratings from the Zoster Brief Pain Inventory (ZBPI) and Medical Outcomes Study 12-item Short Form Survey (SF-12) mental component summary (MCS) and physical component summary (PCS) scores. Vaccine efficacy was calculated for the modified-intention-to-treat trial population and solely in participants who developed HZ. RESULTS: For the modified-intention-to-treat population, the overall zoster vaccine efficacy was 66% (95% confidence interval (CI)=55DS74%) for ZBPI ADL burden of interference score and 55% (95% CI=48DS61%) for both the SF-12 MCS and PCS scores. Of participants who developed HZ, zoster vaccine reduced the ZBPI ADL burden of interference score by 31% (95% CI=12DS51%) and did not significantly reduce the effect on HRQL. CONCLUSIONS: Zoster vaccine reduced the burden of HZ-related interference with ADLs in the population of vaccinees and in vaccinees who developed HZ. Zoster vaccine reduced the effect of HZ on HRQL in the population of vaccinees but not in vaccinees who developed HZ. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To accelerate clinical development, seamless 2/3 adaptive design is an attractive strategy to combine phase 2 dose selection with phase 3 confirmatory objectives. As the regulatory requirement for dose optimization in oncology drugs shifted from maximum tolerated dose to maximum effective dose, it's important to gather more data on multiple candidate doses to inform dose selection. A phase 3 dose may be selected based on phase 2 results and carried forward in phase 3 study. Data obtained from both phases will be combined in the final analysis. In many disease settings biomarker endpoints are utilized for dose selection as they are correlated with the clinical efficacy endpoints. As discussed in Li et al. (2015), the combined analysis may cause type I error inflation due to the correlation and dose selection. Sidák adjustment has been proposed to control the overall type I error by adjusting p-values in phase 2 when performing the combined p-value test. However, this adjustment could be overly conservative as it does not consider the underlying correlations among doses/endpoints. We propose an alternative approach utilizing biomarker rank-based ordered test statistics which takes the rank order of the selected dose and the correlation into consideration. If the correlation is unknown, we propose a rank-based Dunnett adjustment, which includes the traditional Dunnett adjustment as a special case. We show that the proposed method controls the overall type I error, and leads to a uniformly higher power than Sidák adjustment and the traditional Dunnett adjustment under all potential correlation scenarios discussed., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Response adaptive randomization (RAR) is appealing from methodological, ethical, and pragmatic perspectives in the sense that subjects are more likely to be randomized to better performing treatment groups based on accumulating data. However, applications of RAR in confirmatory drug clinical trials with multiple active arms are limited largely due to its complexity, and lack of control of randomization ratios to different treatment groups. To address the aforementioned issues, we propose a Response Adaptive Block Randomization (RABR) design allowing arbitrarily prespecified randomization ratios for the control and high-performing groups to meet clinical trial objectives. We show the validity of the conventional unweighted test in RABR with a controlled type I error rate based on the weighted combination test for sample size adaptive design invoking no large sample approximation. The advantages of the proposed RABR in terms of robustly reaching target final sample size to meet regulatory requirements and increasing statistical power as compared with the popular Doubly Adaptive Biased Coin Design are demonstrated by statistical simulations and a practical clinical trial design example., (© 2021 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Patients who are immunocompromised because of malignancy have an increased risk of herpes zoster and herpes zoster-related complications. We aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of an inactivated varicella zoster virus (VZV) vaccine for herpes zoster prevention in patients with solid tumour or haematological malignancies., Methods: This phase 3, two-arm, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial with an adaptive design was done in 329 centres across 40 countries. The trial included adult patients with solid tumour malignancies receiving chemotherapy and those with haematological malignancies, either receiving or not receiving chemotherapy. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive four doses of VZV vaccine inactivated by γ irradiation or placebo approximately 30 days apart. The patients, investigators, trial site staff, clinical adjudication committee, and sponsor's clinical and laboratory personnel were masked to the group assignment. The primary efficacy endpoint was herpes zoster incidence in patients with solid tumour malignancies receiving chemotherapy, which was assessed in the modified intention-to-treat population (defined as all randomly assigned patients who received at least one dose of inactivated VZV vaccine or placebo). The primary safety endpoint was serious adverse events up to 28 days after the fourth dose in patients with solid tumour malignancies receiving chemotherapy. Safety endpoints were assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of inactivated VZV vaccine or placebo and had follow-up data. This trial is registered (NCT01254630 and EudraCT 2010-023156-89)., Findings: Between June 27, 2011, and April 11, 2017, 5286 patients were randomly assigned to receive VZV vaccine inactivated by γ irradiation (n=2637) or placebo (n=2649). The haematological malignancy arm was terminated early because of evidence of futility at a planned interim analysis; therefore, all prespecified haematological malignancy endpoints were deemed exploratory. In patients with solid tumour malignancies in the modified intention-to-treat population, confirmed herpes zoster occurred in 22 of 1328 (6·7 per 1000 person-years) VZV vaccine recipients and in 61 of 1350 (18·5 per 1000 person-years) placebo recipients. Estimated vaccine efficacy against herpes zoster in patients with solid tumour malignancies was 63·6% (97·5% CI 36·4 to 79·1), meeting the prespecified success criterion. In patients with solid tumour malignancies, serious adverse events were similar in frequency across treatment groups, occurring in 298 (22·5%) of 1322 patients who received the vaccine and in 283 (21·0%) of 1346 patients who received placebo (risk difference 1·5%, 95% CI -1·7 to 4·6). Vaccine-related serious adverse events were less than 1% in each treatment group. Vaccine-related injection-site reactions were more common in the vaccine group than in the placebo group. In the haematological malignancy group, VZV vaccine was well tolerated and estimated vaccine efficacy against herpes zoster was 16·8% (95% CI -17·8 to 41·3)., Interpretation: The inactivated VZV vaccine was well tolerated and efficacious for herpes zoster prevention in patients with solid tumour malignancies receiving chemotherapy, but was not efficacious for herpes zoster prevention in patients with haematological malignancies., Funding: Merck & Co, Inc., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)