{"id":2466,"date":"2016-05-03T06:27:50","date_gmt":"2016-05-03T10:27:50","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/allphasepharma.com\/dir\/?p=2466"},"modified":"2016-05-03T13:20:03","modified_gmt":"2016-05-03T17:20:03","slug":"solithromycin-cap-study-cap-the-details-in-the-publication","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/allphasepharma.com\/dir\/2016\/05\/03\/2466\/solithromycin-cap-study-cap-the-details-in-the-publication\/","title":{"rendered":"Solithromycin CAP Study: \u00a0Cap the Details (in the Publication)"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"Solitair<\/a><\/p>\n

In a recent publication, the results of a large Phase 3 trial comparing solithromycin with moxifloxacin in the treatment of CAP are presented\u00a0[1]<\/a>. As this was a global registration trial, we should refer to the indication as CABP, the current FDA acronym for a very defined entity which has some very specific entry and evaluation criteria. \u00a0The \u201cB\u201d stands for bacterial, of course, but in this as in so many other CABP trials, one half of patients do not have a documented bacterial infection. Nonetheless, FDA insists on making the ITT population, which includes all patients, i.e., those with \u201cB\u201d and those without \u201cB\u201d the basis of the primary efficacy determination. Not an easy logic to follow, but it has to do with randomization: FDA wants us to use both sides of the brain without prejudice, stupid!<\/p>\n

CABP studies are full of quirks and pitfalls, in case you have not noticed yet. From case selection to disease severity classification, from efficacy\u00a0timing to\u00a0interpretation of results, sponsors have to follow regulatory definitions which have their own logic. It is sad to see how this drive towards more rigorous case selection and greater standardization of the study population has created so much extra work without a clear benefit for patients and clinicians. It also has resulted in lengthy articles chock-full of\u00a0arcane details.

Arguably, the biggest beneficiaries of the revised FDA Guidelines are the CROs who continue to rake in million dollar contracts to enroll patients and manage study sites<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div><\/p>\n

The latest FDA Guidance criteria are the main reason why CABP studies have become so complex\u00a0[2]<\/a>. No wonder the Lancet article is 10 pages long. It would be interesting to learn how many clinicians are interested in the strict regulatory definitions which are presented there, as it only speaks to folks with an interest in study design for regulatory submissions. There is also a 5 page appendix with additional data kindly provided by Cempra. We wish the ratio had been reversed; 5 pages for the main article would seem plenty.<\/p>\n

So, our blog today is not so much about solithromycin and its activity vs moxifloxacin \u2013 both were shown to be equals in the CABP indication alright\u00a0 – but about the inordinate length of articles describing a regulatory submission study. We are using the SOLITAIRE-ORAL trial as an example but could have chosen another recent vintage CABP publications.<\/p>\n

A CABP trial in Lancet is a 15-page affair, Nature published the discovery of the Double Helix on 2 pages. The key article on X-rays and all its properties by Roentgen fit on 9 small-sized pages<\/span>.<\/p>\n<\/div>We believe that the busy clinician treating CAP patients is not interested in\u00a0learning that randomization was done following a \u2018block size of four\u2019 procedure. And we doubt that many readers fully understand why there is an efficacy analysis at 72 hours, and why data for ITT, safety, mITT, mITT-2 and a clinically evaluable population are being presented. Several of these data sets are numerically so similar that they convey no new information.<\/p>\n

Such data dump is overkill; why not put standard technical detail in the appendix? Transparency and attention to detail are important, no doubt, but the results could be presented in a much more understandable fashion. It is really hard to see the wood for the trees (well, in this case the trees look more like heaps of wood chips).

They taught you\u00a0in school to adjust presentations\u00a0with the audience in mind. The Lancet article speaks more to the regulator than the practicing clinician<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div><\/p>\n

Despite its length, some pieces of\u00a0information are\u00a0lacking. For instance, one\u00a0would have liked to learn about the outcome of the valid patient population that had a valid entry pathogen and a full 5-7 day course of antibiotic therapy. In the past, this was called the CE (clinically evaluable) and ME (microbiologically evaluable) populations; they are subsets of the ITT and mITT-2 populations, respectively. Without\u00a0this information it is virtually impossible to compare the SOLITAIRE data to older\u00a0CAP studies which used the previous\u00a0FDA efficacy criteria*.<\/p>\n

For the SOLITAIRE-ORAL trial, it took 21 months and 114 centers to randomize 860 patients; a total of 1032 patients were screened for eligibility. In the microbiological mITT subset (all treated with a valid entry pathogen), there were 561 cases, worse even, in the stricter mITT-2 population we find only 225 cases between the 2 study arms. In summary, 225\/860 or only 26% of patients were evaluable for this ITT-based efficacy analysis. The ME population would be even smaller.<\/p>\n

The complexities introduced by non-harmonized trial design requirements between FDA and EMA are considerable and can become derailers. This was an operationally challenging study\u00a0and a\u00a0huge (and costly) effort. Cempra has to be congratulated for what seems to be an extremely well executed trial.<\/p>\n

Our plea: provide clinical trial information in a more condensed way, concentrating on what is important for clinical practice. Relegate details of marginal interest of clinicians to an appendix for those readers\u00a0who wants to dig deeper.<\/p>\n

NOTE:<\/strong>
\n* The CE-Short Term f\/u data are presented. However, the definition of CE-ST f\/u is different from the prior TOC (Test-of-Cure) or EOT (End-of-Therapy) time points.<\/p>\n

References:<\/strong>
\n<\/strong>[1]<\/a> C Barrera. E\ufb03cacy and safety of oral solithromycin versus oral moxi\ufb02oxacin for treatment of community-acquired bacterial pneumonia: a global, double-blind, multicentre, randomised, active-controlled, non-inferiority trial (SOLITAIRE-ORAL). Lancet Infect Dis 2016; 16: 421\u201330
\n[2]<\/a> http:\/\/www.fda.gov\/downloads\/drugs\/guidancecomplianceregulatoryinformation\/guidances\/ucm123686.pdf<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

In a recent publication, the results of a large Phase 3 trial comparing solithromycin with moxifloxacin in the treatment of CAP are presented\u00a0[1]. As this was a global registration trial, we should refer to the indication as CABP, the current FDA acronym for a very defined entity which has some Continue reading Solithromycin CAP Study: \u00a0Cap the Details (in the Publication)<\/span>→<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":2467,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[227,18],"tags":[1271,403,215,783,442,819,625,5,99,1583,1627,47,1628,1626,468],"class_list":["post-2466","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-recent_literature","category-the_viewpoint","tag-allphase-pharma-consulting","tag-antibiotic-blog","tag-avelox","tag-cabp","tag-cap","tag-cempra","tag-ema","tag-fda","tag-fda-guidance","tag-harald-reinhart","tag-lack-of-ich-harmonization","tag-moxifloxacin","tag-populations-for-efficacy-analysis","tag-solitaire-oral","tag-solithromycin"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/allphasepharma.com\/dir\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/04\/Solitair-ORAL-slider-copy.jpg?fit=640%2C180&ssl=1","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p4KWFr-DM","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":2830,"url":"https:\/\/allphasepharma.com\/dir\/2016\/10\/27\/2830\/solithromycin-solitaire-iv-so-so-results-for-a-so-so-drug\/","url_meta":{"origin":2466,"position":0},"title":"Solithromycin SOLITAIRE-IV: So-So Results for a So-So Drug","author":"Harald","date":"October 27, 2016","format":false,"excerpt":"Just before the November 4th AMDAC on solithromycin, we are being treated to a very fine piece of study write-up. Of course, we are speaking of the File paper on the SOLITAIRE-IV trial, and what a fine piece of crafty penmanship it is, if you haven\u2019t noticed. Just as a\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "QIDP Antibiotics"","block_context":{"text":"QIDP Antibiotics","link":"https:\/\/allphasepharma.com\/dir\/category\/qidp_antibiotic\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"soli-iv-newer","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/allphasepharma.com\/dir\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/SOLI-IV-newer.jpg?resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/allphasepharma.com\/dir\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/SOLI-IV-newer.jpg?resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/allphasepharma.com\/dir\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/SOLI-IV-newer.jpg?resize=525%2C300 1.5x"},"classes":[]},{"id":4745,"url":"https:\/\/allphasepharma.com\/dir\/2025\/07\/18\/4745\/cabp-trial-enrollment-but-not-in-the-usa\/","url_meta":{"origin":2466,"position":1},"title":"CABP TRIAL ENROLLMENT \u2013 BUT NOT IN THE USA","author":"Harald","date":"July 18, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"Today\u2019s topic is about the lackluster recruitment of US centers in recent CABP trials. We noticed that Eastern European (EE) centers, specifically from Ukraine, Bulgaria, and Serbia, contribute patients in large numbers, actually making these trials feasible.\u00a0 When sponsors and CROs needed to enroll CABP patients, they could not rely\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Did you know...?"","block_context":{"text":"Did you know...?","link":"https:\/\/allphasepharma.com\/dir\/category\/interesting_facts\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/allphasepharma.com\/dir\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/image.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/allphasepharma.com\/dir\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/image.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/allphasepharma.com\/dir\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/image.png?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/allphasepharma.com\/dir\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/image.png?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":1265,"url":"https:\/\/allphasepharma.com\/dir\/2015\/02\/11\/1265\/commenting-on-comments-the-ceftaroline-trial-program-in-cabp\/","url_meta":{"origin":2466,"position":2},"title":"Commenting on Comments:\u00a0 The Ceftaroline Trial Program in CABP","author":"Harald","date":"February 11, 2015","format":false,"excerpt":"The ceftaroline (Teflaro\u00ae) program was executed at a time when FDA was debating a new CABP Guidance with new outcome measures: no longer was the time-honored TOC assessment acceptable, instead improvement on Day 3-5 was to become the new primary endpoint.\u00a0 FDA made other significant changes to the old 1998\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Recent Literature"","block_context":{"text":"Recent Literature","link":"https:\/\/allphasepharma.com\/dir\/category\/recent_literature\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Teflaro Ad CAP","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/allphasepharma.com\/dir\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/02\/Teflaro-Ad-CAP.jpg?resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/allphasepharma.com\/dir\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/02\/Teflaro-Ad-CAP.jpg?resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/allphasepharma.com\/dir\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/02\/Teflaro-Ad-CAP.jpg?resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/allphasepharma.com\/dir\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/02\/Teflaro-Ad-CAP.jpg?resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":2998,"url":"https:\/\/allphasepharma.com\/dir\/2017\/01\/12\/2998\/omissions-commissions-errors-blunders-solithromycin\/","url_meta":{"origin":2466,"position":3},"title":"Omissions \u2013 Commissions \u2013 Errors \u2013 Blunders – Solithromycin","author":"Harald","date":"January 12, 2017","format":false,"excerpt":"Cempra received a complete response letter (CRL) as a X-mas present from FDA, and the news was pretty bad for company investors. Bad, but not totally unexpected after the AMDAC meeting last November, which taught us a few new things about the drug. It also highlighted how strategic missteps can\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "QIDP Antibiotics"","block_context":{"text":"QIDP Antibiotics","link":"https:\/\/allphasepharma.com\/dir\/category\/qidp_antibiotic\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/allphasepharma.com\/dir\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/Solithro-Ketek-slider.jpg?resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/allphasepharma.com\/dir\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/Solithro-Ketek-slider.jpg?resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/allphasepharma.com\/dir\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/Solithro-Ketek-slider.jpg?resize=525%2C300 1.5x"},"classes":[]},{"id":2862,"url":"https:\/\/allphasepharma.com\/dir\/2016\/11\/07\/2862\/profiling-solithromycin-fda-amdac-on-solithera\/","url_meta":{"origin":2466,"position":4},"title":"Profiling Solithromycin: FDA AMDAC on Solithera","author":"Harald","date":"November 7, 2016","format":false,"excerpt":"Police profiling based on race, sex or gender is a highly controversial practice. FDA doing the same, not so much. Profiling based on similarities to other drugs in the same category is nothing new. Class labeling can be expected for the next new B-lactam or quinolone regardless of whether during\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "QIDP Antibiotics"","block_context":{"text":"QIDP Antibiotics","link":"https:\/\/allphasepharma.com\/dir\/category\/qidp_antibiotic\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"solithro-pipe-magritte","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/allphasepharma.com\/dir\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/11\/Solithro-Pipe-Magritte.jpg?resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/allphasepharma.com\/dir\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/11\/Solithro-Pipe-Magritte.jpg?resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/allphasepharma.com\/dir\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/11\/Solithro-Pipe-Magritte.jpg?resize=525%2C300 1.5x"},"classes":[]},{"id":3297,"url":"https:\/\/allphasepharma.com\/dir\/2017\/04\/12\/3297\/fda-radical-reform\/","url_meta":{"origin":2466,"position":5},"title":"FDA Needs Radical Reform","author":"Harald","date":"April 12, 2017","format":false,"excerpt":"The nomination of Dr. Scott Gottlieb for\u00a0FDA commissioner, a political appointee, has created the usual bipartisan furor. He is called unqualified, a renegade, not committed enough to FDA orthodoxy, an industry darling by some and a maverick by others. All the while FDA lobbyists are singing the praises of an\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "The News"","block_context":{"text":"The News","link":"https:\/\/allphasepharma.com\/dir\/category\/the_news\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/allphasepharma.com\/dir\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/04\/FDA-change-slider.jpg?resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/allphasepharma.com\/dir\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/04\/FDA-change-slider.jpg?resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/allphasepharma.com\/dir\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/04\/FDA-change-slider.jpg?resize=525%2C300 1.5x"},"classes":[]}],"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/allphasepharma.com\/dir\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2466","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/allphasepharma.com\/dir\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/allphasepharma.com\/dir\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/allphasepharma.com\/dir\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/allphasepharma.com\/dir\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2466"}],"version-history":[{"count":10,"href":"https:\/\/allphasepharma.com\/dir\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2466\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2478,"href":"https:\/\/allphasepharma.com\/dir\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2466\/revisions\/2478"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/allphasepharma.com\/dir\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2467"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/allphasepharma.com\/dir\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2466"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/allphasepharma.com\/dir\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2466"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/allphasepharma.com\/dir\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2466"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}