Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 6 de 6
Filter
1.
Lancet Oncol ; 21(2): e83-e96, 2020 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32007209

ABSTRACT

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs), such as symptoms, function, and other health-related quality-of-life aspects, are increasingly evaluated in cancer randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to provide information about treatment risks, benefits, and tolerability. However, expert opinion and critical review of the literature showed no consensus on optimal methods of PRO analysis in cancer RCTs, hindering interpretation of results. The Setting International Standards in Analyzing Patient-Reported Outcomes and Quality of Life Endpoints Data Consortium was formed to establish PRO analysis recommendations. Four issues were prioritised: developing a taxonomy of research objectives that can be matched with appropriate statistical methods, identifying appropriate statistical methods for PRO analysis, standardising statistical terminology related to missing data, and determining appropriate ways to manage missing data. This Policy Review presents recommendations for PRO analysis developed through critical literature reviews and a structured collaborative process with diverse international stakeholders, which provides a foundation for endorsement; ongoing developments of these recommendations are also discussed.


Subject(s)
Neoplasms/therapy , Patient Reported Outcome Measures , Quality of Life , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic/standards , Research Design/standards , Consensus , Humans
2.
Lancet Oncol ; 19(5): e267-e274, 2018 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29726391

ABSTRACT

The clinical development of cancer therapeutics is a global undertaking, and incorporation of the patient experience into the clinical decision-making process is of increasing interest to the international regulatory and health policy community. Disease and treatment-related symptoms and their effect on patient function and health-related quality of life are important outcomes to consider. The identification of methods to scientifically assess, analyse, interpret, and present these clinical outcomes requires sustained international collaboration by multiple stakeholders including patients, clinicians, scientists, and policy makers. Several data sources can be considered to capture the patient experience, including patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures, performance measures, wearable devices, and biosensors, as well as the careful collection and analysis of clinical events and supportive care medications. In this Policy Review, we focus on PRO measures and present the perspectives of three international regulatory scientists to identify areas of common ground regarding opportunities to incorporate rigorous PRO data into the regulatory decision-making process.


Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Agents/therapeutic use , Drug Approval/legislation & jurisprudence , Drug Development/legislation & jurisprudence , Health Policy/legislation & jurisprudence , Neoplasms/drug therapy , Patient Participation/legislation & jurisprudence , Patient Reported Outcome Measures , Policy Making , United States Food and Drug Administration/legislation & jurisprudence , Antineoplastic Agents/adverse effects , Canada , Cooperative Behavior , Europe , Government Regulation , Humans , Interdisciplinary Communication , Neoplasms/diagnosis , Neoplasms/psychology , Stakeholder Participation , Treatment Outcome , United States
3.
Value Health ; 21(6): 742-747, 2018 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29909880

ABSTRACT

The US Food and Drug Administration and the Critical Path Institute's Patient-Reported Outcome (PRO) Consortium convened a cosponsored workshop on the use of PRO measures to inform the assessment of safety and tolerability in cancer clinical trials. A broad array of international stakeholders involved in oncology drug development and PRO measurement science provided perspectives on the role of PRO measures to provide complementary clinical data on the symptomatic side effects of anticancer agents. Speakers and panelists explored the utility of information derived from existing and emerging PRO measures, focusing on the PRO version of the National Cancer Institute's Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events. Panelists and speakers discussed potential ways to improve the collection, analysis, and presentation of PRO data describing symptomatic adverse events to support drug development and better inform regulatory and treatment decisions. Workshop participants concluded the day with a discussion of possible approaches to the patient-reported assessment of an investigational drug's overall side effect burden as a potential clinical trial end point. The Food and Drug Administration reiterated its commitment to collaborate with international drug development stakeholders to identify rigorous methods to incorporate the patient perspective into the development of cancer therapeutics.


Subject(s)
Neoplasms/therapy , United States Food and Drug Administration , Antineoplastic Agents/adverse effects , Antineoplastic Agents/therapeutic use , Critical Pathways , Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions , Humans , Medical Oncology , Neoplasms/drug therapy , Patient Reported Outcome Measures , Surveys and Questionnaires , Treatment Outcome , United States
4.
Clin Trials ; 15(6): 624-630, 2018 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30141714

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: There is currently a lack of consensus on how health-related quality of life and other patient-reported outcome measures in cancer randomized clinical trials are analyzed and interpreted. This makes it difficult to compare results across randomized controlled trials (RCTs) synthesize scientific research, and use that evidence to inform product labeling, clinical guidelines, and health policy. The Setting International Standards in Analyzing Patient-Reported Outcomes and Quality of Life Endpoints Data for Cancer Clinical Trials (SISAQOL) Consortium aims to develop guidelines and recommendations to standardize analyses of patient-reported outcome data in cancer RCTs. METHODS AND RESULTS: Members from the SISAQOL Consortium met in January 2017 to discuss relevant issues. Data from systematic reviews of the current state of published research in patient-reported outcomes in cancer RCTs indicated a lack of clear reporting of research hypothesis and analytic strategies, and inconsistency in definitions of terms, including "missing data,""health-related quality of life," and "patient-reported outcome." Based on the meeting proceedings, the Consortium will focus on three key priorities in the coming year: developing a taxonomy of research objectives, identifying appropriate statistical methods to analyze patient-reported outcome data, and determining best practices to evaluate and deal with missing data. CONCLUSION: The quality of the Consortium guidelines and recommendations are informed and enhanced by the broad Consortium membership which includes regulators, patients, clinicians, and academics.


Subject(s)
Patient Reported Outcome Measures , Quality of Life , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Consensus Development Conferences as Topic , Humans , Neoplasms/therapy , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Research Design/standards
5.
Lancet Oncol ; 17(11): e510-e514, 2016 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27769798

ABSTRACT

Measures of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and other patient-reported outcomes generate important data in cancer randomised trials to assist in assessing the risks and benefits of cancer therapies and fostering patient-centred cancer care. However, the various ways these measures are analysed and interpreted make it difficult to compare results across trials, and hinders the application of research findings to inform publications, product labelling, clinical guidelines, and health policy. To address these problems, the Setting International Standards in Analyzing Patient-Reported Outcomes and Quality of Life Endpoints Data (SISAQOL) initiative has been established. This consortium, directed by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC), was convened to provide recommendations on how to standardise the analysis of HRQOL and other patient-reported outcomes data in cancer randomised trials. This Personal View discusses the reasons why this project was initiated, the rationale for the planned work, and the expected benefits to cancer research, patient and provider decision making, care delivery, and policy making.


Subject(s)
Clinical Trials as Topic , Neoplasms/therapy , Patient Reported Outcome Measures , Quality of Life , Humans , Neoplasms/psychology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL