Phase 2 and 3 Clinical Trials in Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension

2008 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 228-234 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zeenat Safdar
2010 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 214-219
Author(s):  
Robyn J. Barst

Drug development is the entire process of introducing a new drug to the market. It involves drug discovery, screening, preclinical testing, an Investigational New Drug (IND) application in the US or a Clinical Trial Application (CTA) in the EU, phase 1–3 clinical trials, a New Drug Application (NDA), Food and Drug Administration (FDA) review and approval, and postapproval studies required for continuing safety evaluation. Preclinical testing assesses safety and biologic activity, phase 1 determines safety and dosage, phase 2 evaluates efficacy and side effects, and phase 3 confirms efficacy and monitors adverse effects in a larger number of patients. Postapproval studies provide additional postmarketing data. On average, it takes 15 years from preclinical studies to regulatory approval by the FDA: about 3.5–6.5 years for preclinical, 1–1.5 years for phase 1, 2 years for phase 2, 3–3.5 years for phase 3, and 1.5–2.5 years for filing the NDA and completing the FDA review process. Of approximately 5000 compounds evaluated in preclinical studies, about 5 compounds enter clinical trials, and 1 compound is approved (Tufts Center for the Study of Drug Development, 2011). Most drug development programs include approximately 35–40 phase 1 studies, 15 phase 2 studies, and 3–5 pivotal trials with more than 5000 patients enrolled. Thus, to produce safe and effective drugs in a regulated environment is a highly complex process. Against this backdrop, what is the best way to develop drugs for pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH), an orphan disease often rapidly fatal within several years of diagnosis and in which spontaneous regression does not occur?


Author(s):  
Ryan J. Urbanowicz ◽  
John H. Holmes ◽  
Dina Appleby ◽  
Vanamala Narasimhan ◽  
Stephen Durborow ◽  
...  

Abstract Objective Data harmonization is essential to integrate individual participant data from multiple sites, time periods, and trials for meta-analysis. The process of mapping terms and phrases to an ontology is complicated by typographic errors, abbreviations, truncation, and plurality. We sought to harmonize medical history (MH) and adverse events (AE) term records across 21 randomized clinical trials in pulmonary arterial hypertension and chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension. Methods We developed and applied a semi-automated harmonization pipeline for use with domain-expert annotators to resolve ambiguous term mappings using exact and fuzzy matching. We summarized MH and AE term mapping success, including map quality measures, and imputation of a generalizing term hierarchy as defined by the applied Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) ontology standard. Results Over 99.6% of both MH (N = 37,105) and AE (N = 58,170) records were successfully mapped to MedDRA low-level terms. Automated exact matching accounted for 74.9% of MH and 85.5% of AE mappings. Term recommendations from fuzzy matching in the pipeline facilitated annotator mapping of the remaining 24.9% of MH and 13.8% of AE records. Imputation of the generalized MedDRA term hierarchy was unambiguous in 85.2% of high-level terms, 99.4% of high-level group terms, and 99.5% of system organ class in MH, and 75% of high-level terms, 98.3% of high-level group terms, and 98.4% of system organ class in AE. Conclusion This pipeline dramatically reduced the burden of manual annotation for MH and AE term harmonization and could be adapted to other data integration efforts.


Author(s):  
Jacqueline V. Scott ◽  
Christine E. Garnett ◽  
Manreet K. Kanwar ◽  
Norman L. Stockbridge ◽  
Raymond L. Benza

2019 ◽  
Vol 28 (02) ◽  
pp. 112-117
Author(s):  
Sanjay Tyagi ◽  
Vishal Batra

AbstractPulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) is an uncommon disease characterized progressive remodeling of pulmonary vasculature. Although treatment for PAH have improved in last two decades but the outcome remains fatal. Currently, the therapies for PAH target three well-established pathways the nitric oxide (NO) pathway, endothelin receptors, and prostanoids. There are multiple potential targets for development of newer drugs in PAH which requires meticulous research and clinical trials.


2009 ◽  
Vol 36 (10) ◽  
pp. 2356-2361 ◽  
Author(s):  
DINESH KHANNA ◽  
OLIVER DISTLER ◽  
JEROME AVOUAC ◽  
FRANK BEHRENS ◽  
PHILIP J. CLEMENTS ◽  
...  

There have been steady efforts to develop a combined response index for systemic sclerosis (CRISS). A parallel and equally successful effort has been made by an Expert Panel on Outcome Measures in PAH related to Systemic Sclerosis (EPOSS) to measure effect in treatment of pulmonary arterial hypertension of systemic sclerosis (PAH-SSc). CRISS conducted a Delphi process combined with expert review to identify 11 candidate domains for inclusion in a core set of outcomes for SSc clinical trials: soluble biomarkers, cardiac, digital ulcers, gastrointestinal, global health, health related quality of life (HRQOL) and function, musculoskeletal, pulmonary, Raynaud’s, renal, and skin. Tools within domains were also agreed upon. Concentrating on one aspect of disease, PAH, EPOSS also conducted a Delphi process and judged the following domains as the most appropriate for randomized controlled trials in PAH-SSc: lung vascular/pulmonary arterial pressure, cardiac function, exercise testing; severity of dyspnea, discontinuation of treatment; quality of life/activities of daily living; global state; and survival. Possible useful tools within each domain were also agreed on. Patient derived, physician derived, and objective measures of response will be included and combined with the idea that each reflects different aspects of PAH (EPOSS) and overall disease (CRISS) although this assumption may not prove true and can be separated if statistically and clinically valid to do so. In either case, prospective studies will require measurement of all domains, and tools are required and will be developed to define appropriate combined measures of response. CRISS and EPOSS are being developed through the OMERACT process. Through Delphi process and literature review significant progress has been made for both indices, and prospective data are being collected.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document