Nakamura Carlos, Bromberg Mark, Bhargava Shivani, Wicks Paul, Zeng-Treitler Qing
Department of Biomedical Informatics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, United States.
J Med Internet Res. 2012 Jun 21;14(3):e90. doi: 10.2196/jmir.2127.
While only one drug is known to slow the progress of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), numerous drugs can be used to treat its symptoms. However, very few randomized controlled trials have assessed the efficacy, safety, and side effects of these drugs. Due to this lack of randomized controlled trials, consensus among clinicians on how to treat the wide range of ALS symptoms and the efficacy of these treatments is low. Given the lack of clinical trials data, the wide range of reported symptoms, and the low consensus among clinicians on how to treat those symptoms, data on the prevalence and efficacy of treatments from a patient's perspective could help advance the understanding of the symptomatic treatment of ALS.
To compare clinicians' and patients' perspectives on the symptomatic treatment of ALS by comparing data from a traditional survey study of clinicians with data from a patient social network.
We used a survey of clinicians' perceptions by Forshew and Bromberg as our primary data source and adjusted the data from PatientsLikeMe to allow for comparisons. We first extracted the 14 symptoms and associated top four treatments listed by Forshew and Bromberg. We then searched the PatientsLikeMe database for the same symptom-treatment pairs. The PatientsLikeMe data are structured and thus no preprocessing of the data was required.
After we eliminated pairs with a small sample, 15 symptom-treatment pairs remained. All treatments identified as useful were prescription drugs. We found similarities and discrepancies between clinicians' and patients' perceptions of treatment prevalence and efficacy. In 7 of the 15 pairs, the differences between the two groups were above 10%. In 3 pairs the differences were above 20%. Lorazepam to treat anxiety and quinine to treat muscle cramps were among the symptom-treatment pairs with high concordance between clinicians' and patients' perceptions. Conversely, amitriptyline to treat labile emotional effect and oxybutynin to treat urinary urgency displayed low agreement between clinicians and patients.
Assessing and comparing the efficacy of the symptomatic treatment of a complex and rare disease such as ALS is not easy and needs to take both clinicians' and patients' perspectives into consideration. Drawing a reliable profile of treatment efficacy requires taking into consideration many interacting aspects (eg, disease stage and severity of symptoms) that were not covered in the present study. Nevertheless, pilot studies such as this one can pave the way for more robust studies by helping researchers anticipate and compensate for limitations in their data sources and study design.
虽然已知只有一种药物能减缓肌萎缩侧索硬化症(ALS)的进展,但有多种药物可用于治疗其症状。然而,很少有随机对照试验评估这些药物的疗效、安全性和副作用。由于缺乏随机对照试验,临床医生对于如何治疗广泛的ALS症状以及这些治疗方法的疗效,达成的共识较低。鉴于缺乏临床试验数据、所报告症状的多样性以及临床医生在如何治疗这些症状方面的低共识,从患者角度获取的治疗患病率和疗效数据可能有助于增进对ALS症状治疗的理解。
通过比较临床医生传统调查研究的数据与患者社交网络的数据,比较临床医生和患者对ALS症状治疗的看法。
我们将Forshew和Bromberg对临床医生看法的调查作为主要数据源,并对PatientsLikeMe的数据进行调整以便进行比较。我们首先提取Forshew和Bromberg列出的14种症状及相关的前四种治疗方法。然后在PatientsLikeMe数据库中搜索相同的症状 - 治疗对。PatientsLikeMe的数据是结构化的,因此无需对数据进行预处理。
在剔除样本量小的配对后,剩下15对症状 - 治疗对。所有被确定为有用的治疗方法均为处方药。我们发现临床医生和患者对治疗患病率和疗效的看法既有相似之处,也存在差异。在15对中的7对中,两组之间的差异超过10%。在3对中,差异超过20%。治疗焦虑的劳拉西泮和治疗肌肉痉挛的奎宁属于临床医生和患者看法高度一致的症状 - 治疗对。相反,治疗情绪不稳定的阿米替林和治疗尿急的奥昔布宁在临床医生和患者之间的一致性较低。
评估和比较像ALS这样复杂罕见疾病的症状治疗效果并非易事,需要同时考虑临床医生和患者的观点。绘制可靠的治疗效果概况需要考虑许多本研究未涵盖的相互作用因素(如疾病阶段和症状严重程度)。尽管如此,这样的试点研究可以通过帮助研究人员预测并弥补其数据源和研究设计中的局限性,为更有力的研究铺平道路。