A Potential Paradigm for the Robust and Systematic Prioritisation of Assets in Academic-Led, Multi-Industry Collaborative Trials in Rare Populations (Glo-BNHL)
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Overview Given the rarity of children and adolescents with relapsed and refractory (r/r) B-cell Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma (B-NHL) and the large number of potential agents in development for adult mature B-cell malignancies, there is urgent need for prioritisation of agents as proposed by the ACCELERATE Paediatric Strategy Forum for medicinal development in paediatric B-NHL (Pearson 2019). The process developed for the global platform study Glo-BNHL (published separately) is described here. Prioritisation process Assets submitted for review by industry collaborators are prioritised under Confidentiality Disclosure Agreements by the Glo-BNHL Trial Steering Committee (TSC) comprising expert clinicians, statisticians and patient representatives. The assessment includes a quantitative element addressing each of the following areas, with greater weighting given to more relevant criteria such as paediatric-specific and clinical data. Target and scientific rationaleAsset position within current prioritisation strategy*Pre-clinical data evaluating in vitro sensitivity, including the number, heterogeneity and relevance of cell lines tested and quality of the submitted elements of evidencePre-clinical data evaluating in vivo activity of the asset including the number, type and relevance of models and quality of the elements of evidence submittedClinical data regarding monotherapy efficacy in single arm and randomised trials, including the disease-type and therapeutic regimen studiedClinical data regarding combination efficacy (if studied)Clinical data regarding safety of the agent with regard to frequency, severity and modifiability of adverse events, including applicability to the paediatric populationFeasibility of delivery in paediatrics, including formulation and dose-confirmation processes *Classes of novel agents prioritised for inclusion at the initiation of the trial were: (1) Bispecific antibodies (2) antibody-drug conjugates (3) chimeric antigen receptor T-cell products. The TSC has committed to updating this list as the field evolves. The assessment also includes a qualitative element incorporating expert opinion regarding relevance of the target, mechanism of action, and overall impression of the asset. These elements are combined to inform the final discussion before a decision is made. A formal written response from the Sponsor and TSC Chair outlining the TSC decision on whether the asset has been prioritised for evaluation within Glo-BNHL, and associated rationale, is issued to the relevant industry partner (now also copied to the European Medicines Agency (EMA)) within 28 days of receipt of the asset information pack. A follow-up clarification meeting is offered. For prioritised assets, following agreement from the relevant industry partner, the process of formal inclusion in Glo-BNHL then begins. Scope of assets reviewed Between September 2020 and June 2023, information packs for 7 assets were submitted for review from 6 pharmaceutical companies. The assets spanned 5 classes of drugs: 3 bispecific antibodies, 1 antibody-drug conjugate, 1 chimeric antigen receptor T-cell product, 1 small molecule inhibitor and 1 immunomodulator. Formal responses were issued within a median of 20 days (mean 21.3 days) followed by a clarification meeting on 5 occasions. Prioritised assets Four of the 7 reviewed assets were prioritised for inclusion within Glo-BNHL. At time of planned opening only 2 of these assets are included. The other 2 assets are being investigated in industry-led competitive trials. A further asset was deemed to be of potential interest but insufficient data were available due to the early stage of development to reach a final conclusion (further review pending). Non-prioritised assets The rationale for non-prioritisation of assets included irrelevant target in paediatric B-NHL, insufficiently convincing mechanism of action, and lack of superiority over other agents within a non-prioritised class. The EMA has subsequently waived the obligation to submit the results of paediatric B-NHL studies for both non-prioritised assets reasoning they do not represent potential for significant therapeutic benefit. Summary The Glo-BNHL international platform trial prioritisation process represents a model for handling the challenge of development of multiple potential agents in very rare populations in the global arena.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,751 | 0,666 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,006 | 0,007 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,011 | 0,008 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,005 | 0,009 |
| Communication savante | 0,028 | 0,019 |
| Science ouverte | 0,011 | 0,031 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,013 | 0,019 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,012 | 0,005 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; l’étiquette directe de Gemma et le classifieur distillé Codex s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».