Levitan Bennett, Phillips Lawrence D, Walker Stuart
1 Department of Epidemiology, Janssen Research & Development LLC, Titusville, NJ, USA.
2 Department of Management, Management Science Group, London School of Economics, London, UK.
Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2014 Sep;48(5):564-573. doi: 10.1177/2168479014536500.
Assessing the utility of structured approaches to benefit-risk assessment of medicinal products is challenging, in part due to the lack of a gold standard for results and the uncertainty inherent in the data. In place of conducting formal testing, obtaining feedback from users of structured approaches provides insight into their value and limitations. The authors conducted a simulated single-session benefit-risk decision in which 3 groups applied the PhRMA BRAT(Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America Benefit-Risk Action Team) framework or the multicriteria decision analysis approach. The groups were provided with background and data for a hypothetical triptan for acute migraine in a population with cardiovascular risk factors and were asked to determine and defend an approval decision. Three insights emerged consistently from the groups: (1) the value of a structured approach to benefit-risk assessment, (2) the clarity provided by real-time visualization tools, and, most critically, (3) the importance of bringing the patient into the discussion early.
评估结构化方法在药品获益-风险评估中的效用具有挑战性,部分原因是缺乏结果的金标准以及数据中固有的不确定性。作为进行正式测试的替代方法,从结构化方法的使用者那里获得反馈可以深入了解其价值和局限性。作者进行了一次模拟的单阶段获益-风险决策,其中3个小组应用了美国制药研究与制造商协会获益-风险行动小组(PhRMA BRAT)框架或多标准决策分析方法。为这些小组提供了关于一种用于有心血管危险因素人群的急性偏头痛的假设性曲坦类药物的背景和数据,并要求他们确定并捍卫一项批准决定。这些小组一致得出了三点见解:(1)结构化获益-风险评估方法的价值;(2)实时可视化工具提供的清晰度;以及最关键的是,(3)尽早让患者参与讨论的重要性。