首页> 外文期刊>The Journal of rheumatology >Standardizing assessment and reporting of adverse effects in rheumatology clinical trials II: the Rheumatology Common Toxicity Criteria v.2.0.
【24h】

Standardizing assessment and reporting of adverse effects in rheumatology clinical trials II: the Rheumatology Common Toxicity Criteria v.2.0.

机译:风湿病临床试验中不良反应的标准化评估和报告II:风湿病常见毒性标准v.2.0。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

OBJECTIVE: The OMERACT Drug Safety Working Group focuses on standardization of assessment and reporting of adverse events in clinical trials and longitudinal and observational studies in rheumatology. This group developed the Rheumatology Common Toxicity Criteria (RCTC) in 1999, building on the Oncology Common Toxicity Criteria. At OMERACT 8, a workshop group reviewed the use of the RCTC and other instruments in rheumatology clinical trials to date, to revise and to stimulate its implementation. METHODS: The Working Group drafted a revision of the RCTC after an iterative examination of its contents, terms, and definitions. The RCTC were compared with the Oncology Common Toxicity Criteria (CTC v.2.0), and the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE v.3.0). In addition a pharmaceutical company focus group met to clarify the challenges of application of RCTC terms and definitions, relative to the standard in pharmaceutical clinical trials, i.e., verbatim recording of adverse events followed by mapping to Medical Dictionary of Drug Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) terms. The workshop focused on the proposed revision of RCTC to version 2.0 and on the research agenda, including a validation of the RCTC in future trials. RESULTS: At OMERACT 8, breakout groups amended the contents of the 4 current and 2 new categories of adverse event terms within the draft RCTC v.2.0. Participants recognized the need to standardize the definitions for disease flares, infection, malignancy, and certain syndromes such as drug hypersensitivity and infusion reactions. Moderate consensus (62%) was reached in the final plenary session that the amended RCTC v.2.0 should be promulgated and tested in available trials of anti-tumor necrosis factor agents. CONCLUSION: The RCTC has face validity and construct validity. However, documentation of discrimination and feasibility (the other elements of the OMERACT filter) is needed. Collaboration with drug safety working groups in rheumatology professional organizations is necessary to enable this project.
机译:目的:OMERACT药物安全工作组致力于风湿病临床试验以及纵向和观察性研究中不良事件评估和报告的标准化。该小组于1999年根据肿瘤学常见毒性标准制定了《风湿病常见毒性标准》(RCTC)。迄今为止,在OMERACT 8上,一个研讨会小组审查了RCTC和其他仪器在风湿病临床试验中的使用,以修订和促进其实施。方法:工作组在反复研究其内容,术语和定义后起草了RCTC修订版。将RCTC与《肿瘤学通用毒性标准》(CTC v.2.0)和《不良事件通用术语标准》(CTCAE v.3.0)进行了比较。此外,制药公司焦点小组开会以阐明相对于药物临床试验中的标准而言,应用RCTC术语和定义所面临的挑战,即逐字记录不良事件,然后映射到药物监管活动医学词典(MedDRA)术语。研讨会的重点是将RCTC修订为2.0版以及研究议程,包括在以后的试验中对RCTC进行验证。结果:在OMERACT 8上,分组讨论会修订了RCTC v.2.0草案中4个当前类别和2个新类别的不良事件术语的内容。与会者认识到需要标准化疾病发作,感染,恶性肿瘤和某些综合征(例如药物超敏反应和输注反应)的定义。在最后一次全体会议上达成了中度共识(62%),应发布修订的RCTC v.2.0并在现有的抗肿瘤坏死因子药物试验中进行测试。结论:RCTC具有面子效度和结构效度。但是,需要记录歧视和可行性(OMERACT过滤器的其他元素)。与风湿病专业组织中的药物安全性工作小组合作是实现该项目所必需的。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号