Investigating variability in patient response to treatment – a case study from a replicate cross-over study

Abstract

It is a common belief that individual variation in response to treatment is an important explanation for the variation in observed outcomes in clinical trials. If such variation is large, it seems reasonable to suppose that progress in treating disease will be advanced by classifying patients according to their abilities or not to ‘respond’ to particular treatments. We consider that there is currently a lost opportunity in drug development. There is a great deal of talk about individual response to treatment and tailor-made drugs. However, relatively little work is being done to formally investigate, using suitable designs, where individual response to treatment may be important. Through a case study from a replicate cross-over study we show how, given suitable replication, it is possible to isolate the component of variation corresponding to patient-by-treatment interaction and hence investigate the possibility of individual response to treatment.

Keywords

replicate cross-over treatment response within subject variability personalised medicine components of variation

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Harbron

. Statistics and the medicine of the future. Significance 2006; 3: 66–68.

Farkas

Greenblatt DJ . Influence of fruit juices on drug disposition: discrepancies between in vitro and clinical studies. Expert Opinion on Drug Metabolism and Toxicology 2008; 4: 381–393.

Bressler

. Grapefruit juice and drug interactions. Exploring mechanisms of this interaction and potential toxicity for certain drugs. Geriatrics 2006; 61: 12–18.

Senn

. Individual therapy: new dawn or false dawn. Drug Information Journal 2001; 35: 1479–1494.

Senn

. Individual response to treatment: is it a valid assumption? BMJ 2004; 329: 966–968.

Senn

Julious

. Measurement in clinical trials: a neglected issue for statisticians? Statistics in Medicine 2009; 28: 3189–3209.

Senn

. Statistical issues in drug development 1997; Chichester: John Wiley.

Kalow

Tang

Endrenyi

. Hypothesis: comparisons of inter- and intra-individual variations can substitute for twin studies in drug research. Pharmacogenetics 1998; 8: 283–289.

Ioannidis

Gwinn

Little

. A road map for efficient and reliable human genome epidemiology. Nature Genetics 2006; 38: 3–5.

10.

Elbaz

Nelson

Payami

. Lack of replication of thirteen single-nucleotide polymorphisms implicated in Parkinson's disease: a large-scale international study. Lancet Neurology 2006; 5: 917–923.

11.

FDA. Guidance for industry. Statistical approaches to establishing bioequivalence, 2001.

12.

Julious

. Tutorial in biostatistics: sample sizes for clinical trials with Normal data. Statistics in Medicine 2004; 23: 1921–1986.

13.

Julious

. An introduction to statistics in early phase trial 2010; Chichester, England: Wiley.

14.

Stocchi

Hersh

Scott

Nausieda

Giorgi

. Ropinirole 24-hour prolonged release and ropinirole immediate release in early Parkinson's disease. Current Medical Research and Opinion 2008; 24: 2883–2895.

15.

Shumaker

Metzler

. The phenytoin trial is a case study of individual bioequivalence. Drug Information Journal 1998; 32: 1063–1072.

16.

Senn

. Trying to be precise about vagueness. Statistics in Medicine 2007; 26: 1417–1430.