Department of Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2010 Aug;88(2):231-6. doi: 10.1038/clpt.2010.79. Epub 2010 Jun 23.
The validity of information regarding drug toxicity in humans depends on the quality of the methods and instruments used to assess adverse drug events (ADEs). This study evaluates the quality of instruments used to assess and report ADEs to institutional review boards (IRBs) at US cancer centers. Forms from all 49 National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated centers were assessed for utility in abstracting event type, severity, and causality; patient demographics; safety monitoring; and consequent changes in the conduct of the relevant study. Of the 55 items considered essential for ADE reporting, one item (event description) was present on all the forms. Seventy-eight percent of the instruments prompted for global introspection of the investigator, a method known to be unreliable. Of the 34 items that our panel of experts considered essential for event description, the median number of items present was four (domain = 1-11). The use of a validated tool to describe and assess event type, severity, and causality may lead to more timely, accurate identification of safety signals in cancer treatment.
评估药物不良反应(ADE)的方法和工具的质量,决定了与人类药物毒性相关信息的有效性。本研究评估了美国癌症中心机构审查委员会(IRB)所使用的评估和报告 ADE 的工具的质量。评估了所有 49 个美国国立癌症研究所(NCI)指定中心的表格,以评估其在提取事件类型、严重程度和因果关系、患者人口统计学、安全性监测以及相关研究的进行的变化方面的实用性。在被认为是 ADE 报告的 55 项必备项目中,有一项(事件描述)存在于所有表格中。78%的仪器提示研究者进行全局反思,这种方法已知是不可靠的。在我们专家组认为对事件描述至关重要的 34 个项目中,出现的中位数为 4 个(域=1-11)。使用经过验证的工具来描述和评估事件类型、严重程度和因果关系,可能会更及时、准确地识别癌症治疗中的安全信号。