ABSTRACT
This narrative review summarises the recommendations of a Working Group of the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases (ESCEO) for the conduct and reporting of real-world evidence studies with a focus on osteoporosis research. PURPOSE: Vast amounts of data are routinely generated at every healthcare contact and activity, and there is increasing recognition that these real-world data can be analysed to generate scientific evidence. Real-world evidence (RWE) is increasingly used to delineate the natural history of disease, assess real-life drug effectiveness, understand adverse events and in health economic analysis. The aim of this work was to understand the benefits and limitations of this type of data and outline approaches to ensure that transparent and high-quality evidence is generated. METHODS: A ESCEO Working Group was convened in December 2022 to discuss the applicability of RWE to osteoporosis research and approaches to best practice. RESULTS: This narrative review summarises the agreed recommendations for the conduct and reporting of RWE studies with a focus on osteoporosis research. CONCLUSIONS: It is imperative that research using real-world data is conducted to the highest standards with close attention to limitations and biases of these data, and with transparency at all stages of study design, data acquisition and curation, analysis and reporting to increase the trustworthiness of RWE study findings.
Subject(s)
Musculoskeletal Diseases , Osteoarthritis , Osteoporosis , Humans , Osteoarthritis/therapy , Musculoskeletal Diseases/therapy , Societies, MedicalABSTRACT
In clinical trials, biochemical markers provide useful information on the drug's mode of action, therapeutic response and side effect monitoring and can act as surrogate endpoints. In pharmacological intervention development for sarcopenia management, there is an urgent need to identify biomarkers to measure in clinical trials and that could be used in the future in clinical practice. The objective of the current consensus paper is to provide a clear list of biochemical markers of musculoskeletal health and aging that can be recommended to be measured in Phase II and Phase III clinical trials evaluating new chemical entities for sarcopenia treatment. A working group of the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases (ESCEO) proposed classifying biochemical markers into 2 series: biochemical markers evaluating musculoskeletal status and biochemical markers evaluating causal factors. For series 1, the group agreed on 4 biochemical markers that should be assessed in Phase II or Phase III trials (i.e., Myostatin-Follistatin, Brain Derived Neurotrophic Factor, N-terminal Type III Procollagen and Serum Creatinine to Serum Cystatin C Ratio - or the Sarcopenia Index). For series 2, the group agreed on 6 biochemical markers that should be assessed in Phase II trials (i.e., the hormones insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-I), dehydroepiandrosterone sulphate, and cortisol, and the inflammatory markers C-reactive protein (CRP), interleukin-6 and tumor necrosis factor-α), and 2 in Phase III trials (i.e., IGF-I and CRP). The group also proposed optional biochemical markers that may provide insights into the mode of action of pharmacological therapies. Further research and development of new methods for biochemical marker assays may lead to the evolution of these recommendations.
