Comparative Study on the Policy of Multiplicity Issues in Clinical Trials at Home and Abroad

Abstract

Objective To study the content of China’s guiding principles on multiplicity issues in clinical trials, and to provide reference for the revision of China’s relevant guiding principles. Methods Based on ICH E9, the similarities and differences of the guiding principles of US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), European Medicines Agency (EMA), and National Medical Products Administration (NMPA) on the multiplicity issues in clinical trials were compared one by one. Results and Conclusion In general, NMPA guidelines are based on ICH E9, but in detail, the guidelines of FDA and EMA focus differently on the multiplicity issues. Therefore, NMPA guidelines need to be detailed and comprehensive. NMPA guidelines can be refined by referring to foreign guidelines to improve the practical guiding significance for clinical research and promote the level of domestic clinical trials in line with international standards.

Keywords

clinical trial / multiplicity issue / solution strategy

References

[1] Pan Jianhong, Zhao Jun, Li Ruobing, et al. Communicate common statistical design issues for registered clinical trial protocols[J]. Chinese Journal of New Drugs, 2020, 29 (22): 2565-2569.

[2] ICH. E9:S tatis tical Principles for Clinical Trials[EB/OL]. (1998-02-05)[2021-09-21]. https://www.cde.org.cn/ichWeb/guideIch/downloadAtt/1/73a9120463027e587f02bdfa852c210b.

[3] Food and Drug Administration. Multiple Endpoints in Clinical Trials: Guidelines for Industry[EB/OL]. (2018-08-24)[2021-09-25]. https://www.fda.gov/downloads/drugs/guidelinescomplianceregulatoryinformation/guideliness/ucm536750.pdf.

[4] European Medicines Agency. Points to Consider on Multiplicity Issues in Clinical Trials[EB/OL]. (2002-09-19)[2021-10-12]. http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientific_guideline/2009/09/WC500003640.pdf.

[5] European Medicines Agency. Guideline on Multiplicity Issues in Clinical Trials[EB/OL]. (2017-06-30)[2021-09-25]. http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientific_guideline/2017/03/WC500224998.pdf.

[6] National Medical Products Administration. Guidelines on Multiplicity in Drug Clinical Trials[EB/OL]. (2020-12-31)[2021-09-23]. https://www.cde.org.cn/main/att/download/e920235d668cdbe06c822acf758aa695.

[7] Dmitrienko A, D’Agostino RB. Multiplicity considerations in clinical trials[J]. The New England Journal of Medicine, 2018, 378 (22): 2115-2122.

[8] Wang Tong, Yi Dong. Statistical considerations of multiplicity in clinical trials[J]. China Health Statistics, 2012, 29 (3): 445-450.

[9] Sakamaki K, Yoshida S, Morita Y, et al. Challenges on multiple endpoints in clinical trials: An industry survey in Japan[J]. Therapeutic Innovation & Regulatory Science, 2020, 54 (3): 528-533.

[10] Sakamaki K, Morita Y, Iba K, et al. Multiplicity adjustment and sample size calculation in clinical trials with multiple endpoints: An industry survey of current practices in Japan[J]. Therapeutic Innovation & Regulatory Science, 2020, 54 (5): 1097-1105.

[11] Guo Zhengmei, Yao Chen, Yan Xiaoyan. Summary of construction methods of composite endpoint evaluation indicators in clinical trials[J]. Chinese Journal of New Drugs, 2013, 22 (23): 2789-2796+2830.

[12] Tang Jianyuan, Wen Baoshu. European pharmaceutical products agency on multiplicity in clinical trials[J]. Chinese Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 2009, 25 (6):539-542.