首页> 外文期刊>Value in health: the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research >A review of quantitative risk-benefit methodologies for assessing drug safety and efficacy-report of the ISPOR risk-benefit management working group.
【24h】

A review of quantitative risk-benefit methodologies for assessing drug safety and efficacy-report of the ISPOR risk-benefit management working group.

机译:评估ISPOR风险收益管理工作组评估药物安全性和疗效报告的定量风险收益方法论。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

OBJECTIVE: Although regulatory authorities evaluate the risks and benefits of any new drug therapy during the new drug-approval process, quantitative risk-benefit assessment (RBA) is not typically performed, nor is it presented in a consistent and integrated framework when it is used. Our purpose is to identify and describe published quantitative RBA methods for pharmaceuticals. METHODS: Using MEDLINE and other Internet-based search engines, a systematic literature review was performed to identify quantitative methodologies for RBA. These distinct RBA approaches were summarized to highlight the implications of their differences for the pharmaceutical industry and regulatory agencies. RESULTS: Theoretical models, parameters, and key features were reviewed and compared for the 12 quantitative RBA methods identified in the literature, including the Quantitative Framework for Risk and Benefit Assessment, benefit-less-risk analysis, the quality-adjusted time without symptoms and toxicity, number needed to treat (NNT), and number needed to harm and their relative-value-adjusted versions, minimum clinical efficacy, incremental net health benefit, the risk-benefit plane (RBP), the probabilistic simulation method, multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA), the risk-benefit contour (RBC), and the stated preference method (SPM). Whereas some approaches (e.g., NNT) rely on subjective weighting schemes or nonstatistical assessments, other methods (e.g., RBP, MCDA, RBC, and SPM) assess joint distributions of benefit and risk. CONCLUSIONS: Several quantitative RBA methods are available that could be used to help lessen concern over subjective drug assessments and to help guide authorities toward more objective and transparent decision-making. When evaluating a new drug therapy, we recommend the use of multiple RBA approaches across different therapeutic indications and treatment populations in order to bound the risk-benefit profile.
机译:目的:尽管监管机构会在新药批准过程中评估任何新药疗法的风险和收益,但通常不会进行定量风险-效益评估(RBA),也不会在使用时将其呈现在一致且完整的框架中。我们的目的是识别和描述已发布的用于药物的定量RBA方法。方法:使用MEDLINE和其他基于Internet的搜索引擎,进行了系统的文献综述,以确定RBA的定量方法。总结了这些独特的RBA方法,以突出它们的差异对制药行业和监管机构的影响。结果:对文献中确定的12种定量RBA方法的理论模型,参数和关键特征进行了审查和比较,包括风险和收益评估的定量框架,无收益风险分析,无症状的经过质量调整的时间以及毒性,需要治疗的数量(NNT),伤害所需的数量及其相对价值调整后的版本,最低临床功效,增加的健康净收益,风险效益平面(RBP),概率模拟方法,多标准决策分析(MCDA),风险收益轮廓(RBC)和陈述的偏好方法(SPM)。某些方法(例如NNT)依赖于主观加权方案或非统计评估,而其他方法(例如RBP,MCDA,RBC和SPM)则评估收益和风险的联合分配。结论:有几种定量的RBA方法可用于减轻对主观药物评估的关注,并有助于指导当局朝着更加客观和透明的决策方向发展。在评估一种新的药物疗法时,我们建议在不同的治疗适应症和治疗人群中使用多种RBA方法,以限制风险-收益状况。

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