Research Manager, Mapi Values, 133 Portland Street, Boston, MA 02114, USA.
Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2010 Aug;10(4):407-20. doi: 10.1586/erp.10.45.
The US FDA has advocated the patient-reported outcome (PRO) draft guidance as the main vehicle for evaluating PRO-based labeling claims for oncology drugs. In addition, FDA-affiliated researchers have identified factors inhibiting acceptance of health-related quality of life (HRQoL)-based claims for oncology product labels. The views of the FDA on PRO claims are extensive and prescriptive. By contrast, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) has conducted authorizations without an explicitly defined approach for evaluating HRQoL data. A reflective paper released in 2005 offered only broad recommendations on HRQoL labeling claims. The different approaches between the two regulatory agencies partly stem from underlying, divergent organizational characteristics. Moreover, general issues inherent in PRO research in oncology trials including trial design, missing data, multiplicity of end points and inconsistent findings of HRQoL data are discussed.
美国 FDA 一直倡导采用患者报告结局(PRO)草案指南作为评估肿瘤药物基于 PRO 的标签声明的主要手段。此外,FDA 附属研究人员已经确定了影响接受肿瘤产品标签基于健康相关生活质量(HRQoL)声明的因素。FDA 对 PRO 声明的看法是广泛而具体的。相比之下,欧洲药品管理局(EMA)在没有明确评估 HRQoL 数据方法的情况下进行了授权。2005 年发布的一份反思性文件仅对 HRQoL 标签声明提供了广泛的建议。这两个监管机构之间的不同方法部分源于其潜在的、不同的组织特征。此外,还讨论了肿瘤试验中 PRO 研究中存在的一般问题,包括试验设计、数据缺失、终点多样性以及 HRQoL 数据的不一致发现。