Section Clinical Tropical Medicine, Department of Infectious Diseases, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
Postdoctoral Fellow of the Research Foundation - Flanders (FWO) and Research Associate of Spiral, Université de Liège, Liège, Belgium.
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018 Nov 15;18(1):134. doi: 10.1186/s12874-018-0601-z.
As increasing numbers of dengue vaccines and therapeutics are in clinical development, standardized consensus clinical endpoint definitions are urgently needed to assess the efficacy of different interventions with respect to disease severity. We aimed to convene dengue experts representing various sectors and dengue endemic areas to review the literature and propose clinical endpoint definitions for moderate and severe disease based on the framework provided by the WHO 2009 classification.
The endpoints were first proposed and discussed in a structured expert consultation. After that, the Delphi method was carried out to assess the usefulness, validity and feasibility of the standardized clinical disease endpoints for interventional dengue research.
Most respondents (> 80%) agreed there is a need for both standardized clinical endpoints and operationalization of severe endpoints. Most respondents (67%) felt there is utility for moderate severity endpoints, but cited challenges in their development. Hospitalization as a moderate endpoint of disease severity or measure of public health impact was deemed to be useful by only 47% of respondents, but 89% felt it could bring about supplemental information if carefully contextualized according to data collection setting. Over half of the respondents favored alignment of the standard endpoints with the WHO guidelines (58%), but cautioned that the endpoints could have ramifications for public health practice. In terms of data granularity of the endpoints, there was a slight preference for a categorical vs numeric system (e.g. 1-10) (47% vs 34%), and 74% of respondents suggested validating the endpoints using large prospective data sets.
The structured consensus-building process was successful taking into account the history of the debate around potential endpoints for severe dengue. There is clear support for the development of standardized endpoints for interventional clinical research and the need for subsequent validation with prospective data sets. Challenges include the complexity of developing moderate disease research endpoints for dengue.
随着越来越多的登革热疫苗和疗法进入临床开发阶段,迫切需要标准化的共识临床终点定义,以评估不同干预措施对疾病严重程度的疗效。我们旨在召集代表不同部门和登革热流行地区的登革热专家,根据世界卫生组织 2009 年分类提供的框架,审查文献并提出中度和重度疾病的临床终点定义。
首先在结构化专家咨询中提出和讨论终点。之后,采用德尔菲法评估标准化临床疾病终点在干预性登革热研究中的有用性、有效性和可行性。
大多数受访者(>80%)认为需要标准化的临床终点和严重终点的操作化。大多数受访者(67%)认为中度严重终点具有实用性,但在其开发方面存在挑战。只有 47%的受访者认为住院作为疾病严重程度的中度终点或衡量公共卫生影响是有用的,但 89%的受访者认为如果根据数据收集情况进行仔细的背景化,它可以提供补充信息。超过一半的受访者赞成将标准终点与世界卫生组织指南对齐(58%),但警告说这些终点可能对公共卫生实践产生影响。就终点的数据粒度而言,有轻微的倾向于使用分类法而不是数字系统(例如 1-10)(47%比 34%),74%的受访者建议使用大型前瞻性数据集验证终点。
考虑到围绕严重登革热潜在终点的辩论历史,结构化的共识建立过程是成功的。明确支持为干预性临床研究制定标准化终点,并需要随后使用前瞻性数据集进行验证。挑战包括为登革热制定中度疾病研究终点的复杂性。