Departments of Health Sciences Research.
Medical Oncology.
Ann Oncol. 2017 Jun 1;28(6):1183-1190. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdx043.
Collection and reporting of adverse events (AEs) and their relatedness to study treatment, known commonly as attribution, in clinical trials is mandated by regulatory agencies (the National Cancer Institute and the Food and Drug Administration). Attribution is assigned by the treating physician using judgment based on various factors including patient's baseline status, disease history, and comorbidity as well as knowledge about the safety profile of the study treatments. We evaluate the patterns of AE attribution (unrelated, unlikely, possibly, probably, and definitely related to the treatment) in treatment, symptom intervention (cancer patients) and cancer prevention (participants at high risk for cancer) setting.
Nine multicenter placebo-controlled trials (two treatment, two symptom intervention, and five cancer prevention) were analysed separately (2155 patients). Frequency and severity of AEs were summarized by arm. Attribution and percentage of repeated AEs whose attribution changed overtime were summarized for the placebo arms. Percentage of physician over- or under-reporting of AE relatedness was calculated for the treatment arms using the placebo arm as the reference.
Across all trials and settings, a very high proportion of AEs reported as related to treatment were classified as possibly related, a significant proportion of AEs in the placebo arm were incorrectly reported as related to treatment, and clinician-reported attribution over-estimated the rate of AEs related to treatment. Fatigue, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, constipation, and neurosensory were the common AEs that were over reported by clinician as related to treatment.
These analyses demonstrate that assigning causality to AE is a complex and difficult process that produces unreliable and subjective data. In randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trials where data are available to objectively assess relatedness of AE to treatment, attribution assignment should be eliminated.
不良反应(AE)的收集和报告及其与研究治疗的相关性,通常称为归因,是监管机构(美国国立癌症研究所和美国食品和药物管理局)的要求。归因是由主治医生根据患者的基线状态、疾病史和合并症以及对研究治疗安全性特征的了解等各种因素,运用判断来确定的。我们评估了治疗、症状干预(癌症患者)和癌症预防(癌症高风险参与者)环境中 AE 归因(无关、不太可能、可能、很可能和肯定相关)的模式。
分析了 9 项多中心安慰剂对照试验(2 项治疗、2 项症状干预和 5 项癌症预防)(2155 名患者)。按手臂总结 AE 的频率和严重程度。总结安慰剂臂中归因发生变化的重复 AE 的百分比。使用安慰剂臂作为参考,计算治疗臂中医生过度或低估 AE 相关性的百分比。
在所有试验和环境中,报告与治疗相关的 AE 中,非常高比例的 AE 被归类为可能相关,安慰剂臂中相当一部分 AE 被错误地报告为与治疗相关,临床医生报告的归因高估了与治疗相关的 AE 发生率。疲劳、恶心、呕吐、腹泻、便秘和神经感觉是常见的 AE,被临床医生过度报告为与治疗相关。
这些分析表明,将因果关系归因于 AE 是一个复杂且困难的过程,会产生不可靠和主观的数据。在有客观评估 AE 与治疗相关性的数据的随机双盲安慰剂对照试验中,应消除归因分配。