Colopy Michael W, Damaraju C V, He Weili, Jiang Qi, Levitan Bennett S, Ruan Shiling, Yuan Zhong
1 Global Statistical Sciences, UCB BioSciences Inc, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
2 Medical Affairs (Cardiovascular & Metabolism) Biostatistics, Janssen Research & Development LLC, Raritan, NJ, USA.
Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2015 May;49(3):425-433. doi: 10.1177/2168479014565469.
Pharmaceutical drugs and devices are increasingly evaluated by quantitative tools that combine benefit and risk. These tools vary by their limitations and desirable properties, which may confuse the decision-making process. Experts from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and industry shared their perspectives at the 2012 American Statistical Association (ASA) Biopharmaceutical Section FDA-Industry Statistics Workshop, and these insights are presented here. First, benefit-risk terminology is given to better understand subtle distinctions. Next, pragmatic considerations in endpoint selection are given that distinguish between benefit-risk assessment and analysis of clinical trials. Then the strengths of weighting methods, including ranking, utilities, and risk tolerance for assessing the trade-off between benefits and risks, are compared. The last topic presented is summarizing information to ease the interpretation, transparency, and ability to support decisions. Benefit-risk methods are moving towards a unified paradigm to make selection of endpoints, weights, and metrics easier and more structured. This will lead to better decision-making based on a transparent assessment and clear interpretability.