Centre of Biostatistics, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland.
Drug Saf. 2012 Sep 1;35(9):711-24. doi: 10.1007/BF03261968.
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the gold standard for assessing the efficacy of drugs but not necessarily so for drug safety where inadequate power to detect either multiple or rare adverse events is a major handicap. Furthermore, the conditions under which drugs are approved for market use are often different from the settings in actual use. Indeed, with their control mechanisms, trials are by design largely inadequate for the identification of potential safety signals, especially of the rare type, hence the value of postmarketing surveillance and risk management plan-based activities. Today, clinical trials constitute only a part of the research that goes into assessing the safety of drugs. Observational studies, where the investigators merely collect data on treatments received by patients and their health status in routine clinical practice are increasing in uptake because they reflect the real-life utility of drugs, despite the absence of random treatment assignment. Although such studies generally provide less compelling evidence than RCTs, they can be far more useful to drug safety assessment activities than generally acknowledged. An increasing number of post-authorization safety studies (PASS) within the European Medicines Agency's jurisdiction are of the observational type - considered perhaps as more appropriate vehicles for exploring and documenting how products perform in the real world. A similar trend is emerging in the US following the FDA Amendments Act of 2007; since early 2010, an increasing number of post-approval commitments mandated by the FDA include observational studies. However, despite this pattern, not much is known about ongoing efforts to address many of the recognized inadequacies associated with existing methodologies and practices currently adopted in observational PASS. This current opinion presents an overview of some of the main challenges we face in prospective observational PASS, mainly from practical experience, and proposes certain steps for improvement.
随机对照试验(RCTs)是评估药物疗效的金标准,但在药物安全性方面并非如此,因为检测多种或罕见不良事件的效力不足是一个主要障碍。此外,药物获得市场批准的条件通常与实际使用的情况不同。事实上,由于试验的控制机制,它们在很大程度上不足以识别潜在的安全信号,尤其是罕见类型的信号,因此需要进行上市后监测和基于风险管理计划的活动。如今,临床试验仅构成评估药物安全性研究的一部分。观察性研究,即研究人员仅在常规临床实践中收集患者接受的治疗和其健康状况的数据,由于反映了药物的实际应用价值,尽管缺乏随机治疗分配,但越来越受到重视。尽管此类研究通常提供的证据不如 RCTs 有说服力,但它们对于药物安全性评估活动的作用可能比人们普遍认为的更为有用。欧洲药品管理局管辖范围内越来越多的授权后安全性研究(PASS)属于观察性研究类型——或许被认为是探索和记录产品在现实世界中表现的更合适的工具。在美国,随着 2007 年《食品和药物管理局修正案》的通过,也出现了类似的趋势;自 2010 年初以来,FDA 要求进行越来越多的批准后承诺,其中包括观察性研究。然而,尽管存在这种模式,但对于解决与目前采用的观察性 PASS 相关的现有方法和实践中的许多公认不足的正在进行的努力,我们知之甚少。本当前观点主要从实践经验出发,概述了我们在前瞻性观察性 PASS 中面临的一些主要挑战,并提出了某些改进步骤。