Suppr超能文献

疫苗试验中安慰剂的使用:世界卫生组织专家小组的建议

Placebo use in vaccine trials: recommendations of a WHO expert panel.

作者信息

Rid Annette, Saxena Abha, Baqui Abdhullah H, Bhan Anant, Bines Julie, Bouesseau Marie-Charlotte, Caplan Arthur, Colgrove James, Dhai Ames, Gomez-Diaz Rita, Green Shane K, Kang Gagandeep, Lagos Rosanna, Loh Patricia, London Alex John, Mulholland Kim, Neels Pieter, Pitisuttithum Punee, Sarr Samba Cor, Selgelid Michael, Sheehan Mark, Smith Peter G

机构信息

Department of Social Science, Health & Medicine, King's College London, Strand, London WC2R 2LS, United Kingdom.

Knowledge, Ethics and Research, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.

出版信息

Vaccine. 2014 Aug 20;32(37):4708-12. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2014.04.022. Epub 2014 Apr 25.

Abstract

Vaccines are among the most cost-effective interventions against infectious diseases. Many candidate vaccines targeting neglected diseases in low- and middle-income countries are now progressing to large-scale clinical testing. However, controversy surrounds the appropriate design of vaccine trials and, in particular, the use of unvaccinated controls (with or without placebo) when an efficacious vaccine already exists. This paper specifies four situations in which placebo use may be acceptable, provided that the study question cannot be answered in an active-controlled trial design; the risks of delaying or foregoing an efficacious vaccine are mitigated; the risks of using a placebo control are justified by the social and public health value of the research; and the research is responsive to local health needs. The four situations are: (1) developing a locally affordable vaccine, (2) evaluating the local safety and efficacy of an existing vaccine, (3) testing a new vaccine when an existing vaccine is considered inappropriate for local use (e.g. based on epidemiologic or demographic factors), and (4) determining the local burden of disease.

摘要

疫苗是预防传染病最具成本效益的干预措施之一。目前,许多针对低收入和中等收入国家被忽视疾病的候选疫苗正进入大规模临床试验阶段。然而,围绕疫苗试验的适当设计存在争议,尤其是当有效疫苗已经存在时,使用未接种疫苗的对照(有或无安慰剂)的问题。本文明确了四种情况下使用安慰剂可能是可以接受的,前提是研究问题无法通过活性对照试验设计得到解答;延迟或放弃有效疫苗的风险得到缓解;使用安慰剂对照的风险因研究的社会和公共卫生价值而合理;并且该研究符合当地卫生需求。这四种情况是:(1)开发当地可负担得起的疫苗;(2)评估现有疫苗在当地的安全性和有效性;(3)当现有疫苗被认为不适用于当地使用时(例如基于流行病学或人口统计学因素)测试新疫苗;以及(4)确定当地的疾病负担。

相似文献

5
COVID-19 vaccine trials: The potential for "hybrid" analyses.COVID-19 疫苗试验:“混合”分析的可能性。
Clin Trials. 2021 Aug;18(4):391-397. doi: 10.1177/17407745211018613. Epub 2021 May 27.
8
The future of Cochrane Neonatal.考克兰新生儿协作网的未来。
Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12.

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

5
A phase 3 trial of RTS,S/AS01 malaria vaccine in African infants.RTS,S/AS01 疟疾疫苗在非洲婴儿中的 3 期临床试验。
N Engl J Med. 2012 Dec 13;367(24):2284-95. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1208394. Epub 2012 Nov 9.
6
Rotavirus vaccination: a concise review.轮状病毒疫苗接种:简明综述。
Clin Microbiol Infect. 2012 Oct;18 Suppl 5:57-63. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-0691.2012.03981.x. Epub 2012 Aug 6.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验