Radcliffe Deborah J, Pliskin Joseph S, Silvers J B, Cuttler Leona
Department of Pediatrics, Rainbow Babies and Childrens Hospital, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio 44106, USA.
Pharmacoeconomics. 2004;22(8):499-524. doi: 10.2165/00019053-200422080-00003.
A fundamental goal of growth hormone (GH) treatment for both adults and children is improvement in quality of life (QOL). Assessments of the therapeutic role of GH depend on its effectiveness in meeting this and other goals (including improved metabolic status in adults and improved growth in children) in relation to economic parameters. However, there are difficulties in interpreting data on GH treatment and QOL. These include controversy about appropriate definitions and measures for assessing QOL, disease adaptation, comorbid conditions, and potential patient selection bias. In GH-deficient adults who have completed linear growth, there is considerable evidence that GH exerts effects on body composition, serum lipids, and bone and mineral density. Several controlled trials have also examined the effect of GH treatment on QOL in GH-deficient adults. They generally indicate improvement in QOL with GH treatment, although there are inconsistencies in the data. Caveats include differing outcome measures and instruments, instruments that are not disease specific, variation in characteristics of patient samples and treatment protocols, evidence of a placebo effect, and some inconsistency among results. Open-label trials in adults also suggest improvement in QOL with GH treatment, although interpretation is limited by potential placebo effects and patient self-selection. Studies in children have generally addressed psychological status, and relatively few specifically focus on QOL. In children with classical GH deficiency, it is intuitive that GH treatment will improve QOL, although hard data are lacking. In children with idiopathic short stature, evidence for improved QOL as a result of GH treatment is not well developed. Translating changes in QOL, together with physiological and metabolic benefits, into economic cost-benefit or cost-effectiveness analyses are needed. In doing so, it will be important to consider subgroups of patients who may derive differential benefit from GH treatment. These analyses are central to the development of a framework for research, decision making, and policy for GH treatment.
生长激素(GH)治疗对成人和儿童的一个基本目标是改善生活质量(QOL)。对GH治疗作用的评估取决于其在实现这一目标及其他目标(包括改善成人的代谢状态和促进儿童生长)方面相对于经济参数的有效性。然而,解释关于GH治疗和QOL的数据存在困难。这些困难包括在评估QOL的适当定义和测量方法、疾病适应性、合并症以及潜在的患者选择偏倚方面存在争议。在已完成线性生长的GH缺乏成人中,有大量证据表明GH对身体成分、血脂以及骨密度和矿物质密度有影响。几项对照试验也研究了GH治疗对GH缺乏成人QOL的影响。这些试验总体上表明GH治疗可改善QOL,尽管数据存在不一致性。需要注意的事项包括不同的结果测量指标和工具、非疾病特异性的工具、患者样本特征和治疗方案的差异、安慰剂效应的证据以及结果之间的一些不一致性。成人的开放标签试验也表明GH治疗可改善QOL,尽管其解释受到潜在安慰剂效应和患者自我选择的限制。儿童研究通常关注心理状态,专门关注QOL的相对较少。在典型GH缺乏的儿童中,直观地认为GH治疗会改善QOL,尽管缺乏确凿数据。在特发性矮小儿童中,关于GH治疗改善QOL的证据尚不充分。需要将QOL的变化以及生理和代谢益处转化为经济成本效益或成本效果分析。在此过程中,考虑可能从GH治疗中获得不同益处的患者亚组将很重要。这些分析对于制定GH治疗的研究、决策和政策框架至关重要。