Suppr超能文献

儿科临床试验中影响疫苗接种后不良事件因果关系评估的因素:一项在线调查。

Factors affecting the causality assessment of adverse events following immunisation in paediatric clinical trials: An online survey.

作者信息

Voysey Merryn, Tavana Rahele, Farooq Yama, Heath Paul T, Bonhoeffer Jan, Snape Matthew D

机构信息

Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK; Oxford Vaccine Group, Department of Paediatrics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.

Oxford Vaccine Group, Department of Paediatrics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.

出版信息

Vaccine. 2015 Dec 16;33(51):7203-7210. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2015.10.126. Epub 2015 Nov 6.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Serious adverse events (SAEs) in clinical trials require reporting within 24h, including a judgment of whether the SAE was related to the investigational product(s). Such assessments are an important component of pharmacovigilance, however classification systems for assigning relatedness vary across study protocols. This on-line survey evaluated the consistency of SAE causality assessment among professionals with vaccine clinical trial experience.

METHODS

Members of the clinical advisory forum of experts (CAFÉ), a Brighton Collaboration online-forum, were emailed a survey containing SAEs from hypothetical vaccine trials which they were asked to classify. Participants were randomised to either two classification options (related/not related to study immunisation) or three options (possibly/probably/unrelated). The clinical scenarios, were (i) leukaemia diagnosed 5 months post-immunisation with a live RSV vaccine, (ii) juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) 3 months post-immunisation with a group A streptococcal vaccine, (iii) developmental delay diagnosed at age 10 months after infant capsular group B meningococcal vaccine, (iv) developmental delay diagnosed at age 10 months after maternal immunisation with a group B streptococcal vaccine.

RESULTS

There were 140 respondents (72 two options, 68 three options). Across all respondents, SAEs were considered related to study immunisation by 28% (leukaemia), 74% (JIA), 29% (developmental delay after infant immunisation) and 42% (developmental delay after maternal immunisation). Having only two options made respondents significantly less likely to classify the SAE as immunisation-related for two scenarios (JIA p=0.0075; and maternal immunisation p=0.045). Amongst study investigators (n=43) this phenomenon was observed for three of the four scenarios: (JIA p=0.0236; developmental delay following infant immunisation p=0.0266; and developmental delay after maternal immunisation p=0.0495).

CONCLUSIONS

SAE causality assessment is inconsistent amongst study investigators and can be influenced by the classification systems available to them. There is a pressing need for SAE classification systems to be standardised across study protocols.

摘要

背景

临床试验中的严重不良事件(SAE)需要在24小时内报告,包括判断该严重不良事件是否与研究用产品相关。此类评估是药物警戒的重要组成部分,然而,不同研究方案中用于确定相关性的分类系统各不相同。这项在线调查评估了具有疫苗临床试验经验的专业人员对严重不良事件因果关系评估的一致性。

方法

向布莱顿协作在线论坛临床咨询专家论坛(CAFÉ)的成员发送了一份调查问卷,其中包含来自假设疫苗试验的严重不良事件,要求他们进行分类。参与者被随机分配到两种分类选项(与研究免疫相关/不相关)或三种选项(可能/很可能/不相关)。临床场景包括:(i)接种活的呼吸道合胞病毒疫苗5个月后诊断为白血病;(ii)接种A组链球菌疫苗3个月后诊断为幼年特发性关节炎(JIA);(iii)婴儿接种B组脑膜炎球菌结合疫苗10个月后诊断为发育迟缓;(iv)母亲接种B组链球菌疫苗后10个月诊断为发育迟缓。

结果

共有140名受访者(72人选择两种选项,68人选择三种选项)。在所有受访者中,分别有28%(白血病)、74%(JIA)、29%(婴儿免疫后发育迟缓)和42%(母亲免疫后发育迟缓)的严重不良事件被认为与研究免疫相关。只有两种选项时,在两种情况下,受访者将严重不良事件分类为与免疫相关的可能性显著降低(JIA,p = 0.0075;母亲免疫,p = 0.045)。在研究调查人员(n = 43)中,在四种情况中的三种观察到了这种现象:(JIA,p = 0.0236;婴儿免疫后发育迟缓,p = 0.0266;母亲免疫后发育迟缓,p = 0.0495)。

结论

研究调查人员对严重不良事件因果关系的评估不一致,并且可能受到他们可用的分类系统的影响。迫切需要在所有研究方案中对严重不良事件分类系统进行标准化。

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