Lindner Mark D
Pharmacol Ther. 2007 Jul;115(1):148-75. doi: 10.1016/j.pharmthera.2007.05.002. Epub 2007 May 13.
Unless it is carefully controlled, bias often distorts the results of clinical trials, usually exaggerating the magnitude of true efficacy. For that reason, procedures to limit bias have been mandated by the FDA when assessing efficacy in clinical trials. The present review shows that the effects of bias in preclinical studies are at least as large as in clinical trials, and since bias is not usually controlled in preclinical proof of concept studies, compounds that actually have little or no therapeutic potential may often be advanced into clinical trials. This possibility is supported by the fact that lack of efficacy is the single biggest reason why compounds fail in the clinic. The shift to target-based discovery during the last 10-15 years may have further increased the effects of bias on preclinical assessments of potential efficacy, and contributed to the continuing decline in clinical success rates. Procedures are available to control for bias during preclinical assessments of potential efficacy, and their use could dramatically increase clinical success rates and substantially reduce the costs of drug discovery and development.
除非得到严格控制,否则偏倚常常会歪曲临床试验结果,通常会夸大真实疗效的程度。因此,美国食品药品监督管理局(FDA)在评估临床试验疗效时,已强制要求采取限制偏倚的程序。本综述表明,临床前研究中偏倚的影响至少与临床试验中的一样大,而且由于在临床前概念验证研究中通常不控制偏倚,实际上几乎没有或根本没有治疗潜力的化合物可能常常会进入临床试验阶段。化合物在临床中失败的最大单一原因是缺乏疗效,这一事实支持了上述可能性。在过去10至15年中向基于靶点的发现方式的转变,可能进一步加大了偏倚对潜在疗效临床前评估的影响,并导致临床成功率持续下降。在对潜在疗效进行临床前评估时,有一些程序可用于控制偏倚,采用这些程序能够显著提高临床成功率,并大幅降低药物研发成本。