首页> 外文期刊>Osteoporosis international: a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA >The use of placebo-controlled and non-inferiority trials for the evaluation of new drugs in the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis.
【24h】

The use of placebo-controlled and non-inferiority trials for the evaluation of new drugs in the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis.

机译:使用安慰剂对照和非劣效性试验评估新药治疗绝经后骨质疏松症。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Registration of new agents for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis has been based over the past few years on placebo-controlled phase III trials with the incidence of patients with new vertebralonvertebral fractures as the most usual primary endpoint. The use of a placebo in diseases where an active treatment is available has been a matter of debate following the update of the Declaration of Helsinki by the World Medical Association which questioned this trial design. Current regulatory recommendations within the European Union suggest that placebo-controlled trials are still the best option when assessing the efficacy and safety of new drugs intended for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. This suggestion seems to be in apparent contradiction with the current content of the Declaration of Helsinki. This paper addresses the ethics and feasibility of placebo-controlled trials in the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis, in the light of available therapeutic options, and discusses possible alternative approaches in those patients where placebo treatment could be deemed to be unethical. It is concluded that placebo-controlled trials remain the most efficient design to establish the efficacy and safety of a new agent for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. Such trials are feasible and ethically acceptable in patients with osteoporosis but without prevalent vertebral fractures. Conversely, in patients with prevalent vertebral fractures, placebo-controlled trials are ethically questionable and non-inferiority trials are more appropriate. A relative margin of non-inferiority of 20-30% is suggested, to be discussed on a case by case basis.
机译:过去几年中,已根据安慰剂对照的III期临床试验注册了用于治疗绝经后骨质疏松症的新药,该试验以新椎/非椎骨骨折患者的发病率为最常见的主要终点。在世界医学协会对《赫尔辛基宣言》进行更新后,对可以进行积极治疗的疾病中使用安慰剂进行辩论一直是一个争论的问题。欧盟内部目前的监管建议表明,在评估旨在治疗绝经后骨质疏松症的新药的有效性和安全性时,安慰剂对照试验仍然是最佳选择。该建议似乎与《赫尔辛基宣言》的现行内容明显矛盾。本文根据可用的治疗选择,探讨了安慰剂对照试验在绝经后骨质疏松症治疗中的道德性和可行性,并讨论了在认为安慰剂治疗不道德的那些患者中可能的替代方法。结论是,安慰剂对照试验仍然是确立用于治疗绝经后骨质疏松症的新药的疗效和安全性的最有效设计。这样的试验在骨质疏松但没有普遍的椎体骨折的患者中是可行的,并且在伦理上是可以接受的。相反,对于普遍存在椎体骨折的患者,安慰剂对照试验在伦理上存在疑问,而非劣效性试验则更合适。非劣质性的相对裕度建议为20-30%,将逐案讨论。

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