• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

英国癌症临床试验中患者报告结局(PRO)方案内容及报告的系统评价:EPiC研究方案

Systematic evaluation of patient-reported outcome (PRO) protocol content and reporting in UK cancer clinical trials: the EPiC study protocol.

作者信息

Ahmed Khaled, Kyte Derek, Keeley Thomas, Efficace Fabio, Armes Jo, Brown Julia M, Calman Lynn, Copland Chris, Gavin Anna, Glaser Adam, Greenfield Diana M, Lanceley Anne, Taylor Rachel, Velikova Galina, Brundage Michael, Mercieca-Bebber Rebecca, King Madeleine T, Calvert Melanie

机构信息

Centre for Patient Reported Outcomes Research (CPROR), University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.

Health Outcomes Research Unit, Italian Group for Adult Hematologic Diseases (GIMEMA), Rome, Italy.

出版信息

BMJ Open. 2016 Sep 21;6(9):e012863. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012863.

DOI:10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012863
PMID:27655263
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5051436/
Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Emerging evidence suggests that patient-reported outcome (PRO)-specific information may be omitted in trial protocols and that PRO results are poorly reported, limiting the use of PRO data to inform cancer care. This study aims to evaluate the standards of PRO-specific content in UK cancer trial protocols and their arising publications and to highlight examples of best-practice PRO protocol content and reporting where they occur. The objective of this study is to determine if these early findings are generalisable to UK cancer trials, and if so, how best we can bring about future improvements in clinical trials methodology to enhance the way PROs are assessed, managed and reported.

HYPOTHESIS

Trials in which the primary end point is based on a PRO will have more complete PRO protocol and publication components than trials in which PROs are secondary end points.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Completed National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Portfolio Cancer clinical trials (all cancer specialities/age-groups) will be included if they contain a primary/secondary PRO end point. The NIHR portfolio includes cancer trials, supported by a range of funders, adjudged as high-quality clinical research studies. The sample will be drawn from studies completed between 31 December 2000 and 1 March 2014 (n=1141) to allow sufficient time for completion of the final trial report and publication. Two reviewers will then review the protocols and arising publications of included trials to: (1) determine the completeness of their PRO-specific protocol content; (2) determine the proportion and completeness of PRO reporting in UK Cancer trials and (3) model factors associated with PRO protocol and reporting completeness and with PRO reporting proportion.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study was approved by the ethics committee at University of Birmingham (ERN_15-0311). Trial findings will be disseminated via presentations at local, national and international conferences, peer-reviewed journals and social media including the CPROR twitter account and UOB departmental website (http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/cpro0r).

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

PROSPERO CRD42016036533.

摘要

引言

新出现的证据表明,患者报告结局(PRO)相关信息可能在试验方案中被遗漏,且PRO结果的报告质量较差,这限制了PRO数据在癌症护理中的应用。本研究旨在评估英国癌症试验方案及其相关出版物中PRO特定内容的标准,并突出最佳实践的PRO方案内容及报告的实例。本研究的目的是确定这些早期发现是否适用于英国癌症试验,如果适用,我们如何才能在未来改进临床试验方法,以提高PRO评估、管理和报告的方式。

假设

主要终点基于PRO的试验将比PRO为次要终点的试验具有更完整的PRO方案和出版物组成部分。

方法与分析

如果包含主要/次要PRO终点,则纳入已完成的英国国家卫生研究院(NIHR)投资组合癌症临床试验(所有癌症专科/年龄组)。NIHR投资组合包括由一系列资助者支持的癌症试验,这些试验被判定为高质量的临床研究。样本将从2000年12月31日至2014年3月1日期间完成的研究中抽取(n = 1141),以便有足够时间完成最终试验报告和发表。然后,两名评审员将审查纳入试验的方案及其相关出版物,以:(1)确定其PRO特定方案内容的完整性;(2)确定英国癌症试验中PRO报告的比例和完整性;(3)模拟与PRO方案和报告完整性以及PRO报告比例相关的因素。

伦理与传播

该研究获得了伯明翰大学伦理委员会的批准(ERN_15 - 0311)。试验结果将通过在地方、国家和国际会议上的报告、同行评审期刊以及社交媒体(包括CPROR推特账户和伯明翰大学部门网站(http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/cpro0r))进行传播。

试验注册号

PROSPERO CRD42016036533。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4114/5051436/18a5db9ab25c/bmjopen2016012863f01.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4114/5051436/18a5db9ab25c/bmjopen2016012863f01.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4114/5051436/18a5db9ab25c/bmjopen2016012863f01.jpg

相似文献

1
Systematic evaluation of patient-reported outcome (PRO) protocol content and reporting in UK cancer clinical trials: the EPiC study protocol.英国癌症临床试验中患者报告结局(PRO)方案内容及报告的系统评价:EPiC研究方案
BMJ Open. 2016 Sep 21;6(9):e012863. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012863.
2
Evaluation of patient-reported outcome protocol content and reporting in UK cancer clinical trials: the EPiC study qualitative protocol.英国癌症临床试验中患者报告结局方案内容及报告情况的评估:EPiC研究定性方案
BMJ Open. 2018 Feb 3;8(2):e017282. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017282.
3
Systematic evaluation of the patient-reported outcome (PRO) content of clinical trial protocols.对临床试验方案中患者报告结局(PRO)内容的系统评价。
PLoS One. 2014 Oct 15;9(10):e110229. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0110229. eCollection 2014.
4
Assessing the collection and reporting of patient-reported outcome data in interventional cancer trials: a single institution, retrospective systematic evaluation.评估介入性癌症试验中患者报告结局数据的收集与报告:一项单机构回顾性系统评价
J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2022 Dec 22;6(1):128. doi: 10.1186/s41687-022-00529-9.
5
Guidelines for Inclusion of Patient-Reported Outcomes in Clinical Trial Protocols: The SPIRIT-PRO Extension.患者报告结局纳入临床试验方案指南:SPIRIT-PRO 扩展
JAMA. 2018 Feb 6;319(5):483-494. doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.21903.
6
Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in randomised controlled trials in diabetes and pregnancy: protocol for a systematic review.糖尿病和妊娠随机对照试验中的患者报告结局(PROs):系统评价方案。
BMJ Open. 2021 Nov 2;11(11):e052506. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-052506.
7
Systematic Evaluation of Patient-Reported Outcome Protocol Content and Reporting in Cancer Trials.系统评价癌症试验中患者报告结局议定书内容和报告情况。
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2019 Nov 1;111(11):1170-1178. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djz038.
8
A systematic evaluation of compliance and reporting of patient-reported outcome endpoints in ovarian cancer randomised controlled trials: implications for generalisability and clinical practice.卵巢癌随机对照试验中患者报告结局终点的依从性和报告的系统评价:对普遍性和临床实践的影响
J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2017;1(1):5. doi: 10.1186/s41687-017-0008-3. Epub 2017 Oct 4.
9
SPIRIT and CONSORT extensions for early phase dose-finding clinical trials: the DEFINE (DosE-FIndiNg Extensions) study protocol.早期阶段剂量发现临床试验的 SPIRIT 和 CONSORT 扩展:DEFINE(剂量发现扩展)研究方案。
BMJ Open. 2023 Mar 29;13(3):e068173. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-068173.
10
Rationale and design of repeated cross-sectional studies to evaluate the reporting quality of trial protocols: the Adherence to SPIrit REcommendations (ASPIRE) study and associated projects.重复横断面研究评估试验方案报告质量的原理与设计:遵循《渥太华小组声明》建议(ASPIRE)研究及相关项目
Trials. 2020 Oct 28;21(1):896. doi: 10.1186/s13063-020-04808-y.

引用本文的文献

1
Low-quality of patient-reported outcome reporting in randomized clinical trials of major depressive disorder-a meta-epidemiological review.重度抑郁症随机临床试验中患者报告结局报告的质量低下——一项元流行病学综述
Front Psychiatry. 2023 Nov 7;14:1246938. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1246938. eCollection 2023.
2
A review of patient-reported outcomes used for regulatory approval of oncology medicinal products in the European Union between 2017 and 2020.2017年至2020年期间欧盟用于肿瘤药品监管批准的患者报告结局综述。
Front Med (Lausanne). 2022 Aug 12;9:968272. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2022.968272. eCollection 2022.
3

本文引用的文献

1
Planning and reporting of quality-of-life outcomes in cancer trials.癌症试验中生活质量结果的规划与报告。
Ann Oncol. 2015 Sep;26(9):1966-1973. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdv283. Epub 2015 Jun 30.
2
Quality of patient-reported outcome reporting across cancer randomized controlled trials according to the CONSORT patient-reported outcome extension: A pooled analysis of 557 trials.根据CONSORT患者报告结局扩展版对癌症随机对照试验中患者报告结局报告质量的评估:557项试验的汇总分析
Cancer. 2015 Sep 15;121(18):3335-42. doi: 10.1002/cncr.29489. Epub 2015 Jun 16.
3
Putting patient-reported outcomes on the 'Big Data Road Map'.
Reporting quality of clinical trial protocols: a repeated cross-sectional study about the Adherence to SPIrit Recommendations in Switzerland, CAnada and GErmany (ASPIRE-SCAGE).
临床试验方案报告质量:瑞士、加拿大和德国(ASPIRE-SCAGE)遵守 SPIrit 建议的研究。
BMJ Open. 2022 May 24;12(5):e053417. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-053417.
4
Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in randomised controlled trials in diabetes and pregnancy: protocol for a systematic review.糖尿病和妊娠随机对照试验中的患者报告结局(PROs):系统评价方案。
BMJ Open. 2021 Nov 2;11(11):e052506. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-052506.
5
'Give Us The Tools!': development of knowledge transfer tools to support the involvement of patient partners in the development of clinical trial protocols with patient-reported outcomes (PROs), in accordance with SPIRIT-PRO Extension.“给我们工具!”:根据 SPIRIT-PRO 扩展,开发知识转移工具以支持患者伙伴参与具有患者报告结局(PROs)的临床试验方案的制定。
BMJ Open. 2021 Jun 30;11(6):e046450. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-046450.
6
SPIRIT-PRO Extension explanation and elaboration: guidelines for inclusion of patient-reported outcomes in protocols of clinical trials.SPIRIT-PRO 扩展说明和阐述:临床试验方案中纳入患者报告结局的指南。
BMJ Open. 2021 Jun 30;11(6):e045105. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-045105.
7
Systematic review of the use of translated patient-reported outcome measures in cancer trials.癌症试验中翻译后患者报告结局测量的使用的系统评价。
Trials. 2021 Apr 26;22(1):306. doi: 10.1186/s13063-021-05255-z.
8
The impact of patient-reported outcome data from clinical trials: perspectives from international stakeholders.临床试验中患者报告结局数据的影响:来自国际利益相关者的观点。
J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2020 Jul 2;4(1):51. doi: 10.1186/s41687-020-00219-4.
9
Systematic Evaluation of Patient-Reported Outcome Protocol Content and Reporting in Cancer Trials.系统评价癌症试验中患者报告结局议定书内容和报告情况。
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2019 Nov 1;111(11):1170-1178. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djz038.
10
The importance of patient-reported outcomes in clinical trials and strategies for future optimization.患者报告结局在临床试验中的重要性及未来优化策略。
Patient Relat Outcome Meas. 2018 Nov 1;9:353-367. doi: 10.2147/PROM.S156279. eCollection 2018.
将患者报告的结果纳入“大数据路线图”。
J R Soc Med. 2015 Aug;108(8):299-303. doi: 10.1177/0141076815579896. Epub 2015 Mar 31.
4
Predictive value of urine interleukin-18 in the evolution and outcome of acute kidney injury in critically ill adult patients.尿液白细胞介素-18 对危重症成年患者急性肾损伤的演变和结局的预测价值。
Br J Anaesth. 2015 Mar;114(3):460-8. doi: 10.1093/bja/aeu382. Epub 2014 Dec 3.
5
Systematic evaluation of the patient-reported outcome (PRO) content of clinical trial protocols.对临床试验方案中患者报告结局(PRO)内容的系统评价。
PLoS One. 2014 Oct 15;9(10):e110229. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0110229. eCollection 2014.
6
Gefitinib for oesophageal cancer progressing after chemotherapy (COG): a phase 3, multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomised trial.吉非替尼治疗化疗后进展的食管癌(COG):一项 3 期、多中心、双盲、安慰剂对照随机试验。
Lancet Oncol. 2014 Jul;15(8):894-904. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(14)70024-5. Epub 2014 Jun 17.
7
How to increase value and reduce waste when research priorities are set.如何在设定研究重点时增加价值和减少浪费。
Lancet. 2014 Jan 11;383(9912):156-65. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)62229-1. Epub 2014 Jan 8.
8
Docetaxel versus active symptom control for refractory oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma (COUGAR-02): an open-label, phase 3 randomised controlled trial.多西他赛对比积极症状控制治疗难治性胃食管腺癌(COUGAR-02):一项开放标签、3 期随机对照试验。
Lancet Oncol. 2014 Jan;15(1):78-86. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(13)70549-7. Epub 2013 Dec 10.
9
Inconsistencies in quality of life data collection in clinical trials: a potential source of bias? Interviews with research nurses and trialists.临床试验中生活质量数据收集的不一致性:潜在的偏倚来源?对研究护士和试验者的访谈。
PLoS One. 2013 Oct 4;8(10):e76625. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0076625. eCollection 2013.
10
Toward patient-centered drug development in oncology.迈向肿瘤学中以患者为中心的药物研发。
N Engl J Med. 2013 Aug 1;369(5):397-400. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1114649. Epub 2013 Jul 3.