• 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

患者对获益-风险的整体评价(PGI-BR):将患者对临床获益-风险的看法纳入新药评估。

Patient Global Impression of Benefit-Risk (PGI-BR): Incorporating Patients' Views of Clinical Benefit-Risk into Assessment of New Medicines.

机构信息

AstraZeneca Gothenburg, Pepparedsleden 1, 431 50, Mölndal, Sweden.

AstraZeneca Gaithersburg, Gaithersburg, MD, USA.

出版信息

Drug Saf. 2021 Oct;44(10):1059-1072. doi: 10.1007/s40264-021-01079-7. Epub 2021 Jun 15.

DOI:10.1007/s40264-021-01079-7
PMID:34129206
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8473342/
Abstract

INTRODUCTION

There is a need to understand how patients assess perceived benefits and risks of treatments.

OBJECTIVES

The study aimed to (i) elucidate how patients evaluate treatment experiences and (ii) develop a brief patient-reported outcome (PRO) instrument for use across disease areas for perceived benefit-risk evaluation of a new medicine in a clinical trial setting.

METHODS

Concepts relating to patient-perceived benefit-risk were identified from literature reviews and qualitative concept elicitation interviews with patients across a variety of primary medical conditions. Draft instrument items were developed from identified concepts and evaluated for clarity, relevance and appropriateness of response options in cognitive interviews. Items were iteratively revised to address patient feedback.

RESULTS

Qualitative interviews were conducted with 47 patients (primary condition: 20 oncological, 12 respiratory, 10 metabolic, 5 cardiovascular), of whom 32 contributed to concept elicitation and 42 to cognitive debriefing. Elicited concepts could be grouped into four medication-related categories: effectiveness of treatment, burden of side effects, convenience of use and overall acceptance/satisfaction. Cost, trial experience and altruism were additional concept categories unrelated to medication. The final instrument contained one item each on the medication's effectiveness, side effects and convenience, and an overall item capturing patient benefit-risk assessment. An upfront question was included to separate out non-medication aspects of patients' experiences.

CONCLUSION

We developed a brief PRO instrument, the Patient Global Impression of Benefit-Risk (PGI-BR), which can be applied across disease areas to assess patient views of benefit-risk of a new medicine in the clinical trial setting.

摘要

简介

了解患者如何评估治疗的获益和风险是必要的。

目的

本研究旨在(i)阐明患者如何评估治疗体验,以及(ii)为临床试验环境中评估新药的获益-风险,开发一种用于跨疾病领域的简短患者报告结局(PRO)工具。

方法

从文献综述和对各种主要医疗条件的患者进行的定性概念启发式访谈中确定了与患者感知获益-风险相关的概念。从确定的概念中开发了草案仪器项目,并在认知访谈中评估了其清晰度、相关性和反应选项的适当性。根据患者的反馈,对项目进行了迭代修订。

结果

对 47 名患者(主要疾病:20 例肿瘤,12 例呼吸,10 例代谢,5 例心血管)进行了定性访谈,其中 32 名患者参与了概念启发,42 名患者参与了认知审查。启发的概念可以分为四个与药物相关的类别:治疗效果、副作用负担、使用便利性和整体接受/满意度。成本、试验经验和利他主义是与药物无关的额外概念类别。最终的仪器包含一个关于药物疗效、副作用和便利性的项目,以及一个用于捕捉患者获益风险评估的整体项目。一个前置问题被包括在内,以区分患者体验的非药物方面。

结论

我们开发了一种简短的 PRO 工具,即患者整体获益风险印象(PGI-BR),它可以应用于跨疾病领域,以评估临床试验环境中新药的获益-风险。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7935/8473342/9d38e509c685/40264_2021_1079_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7935/8473342/78747e883953/40264_2021_1079_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7935/8473342/9d38e509c685/40264_2021_1079_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7935/8473342/78747e883953/40264_2021_1079_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7935/8473342/9d38e509c685/40264_2021_1079_Fig2_HTML.jpg

相似文献

1
Patient Global Impression of Benefit-Risk (PGI-BR): Incorporating Patients' Views of Clinical Benefit-Risk into Assessment of New Medicines.患者对获益-风险的整体评价(PGI-BR):将患者对临床获益-风险的看法纳入新药评估。
Drug Saf. 2021 Oct;44(10):1059-1072. doi: 10.1007/s40264-021-01079-7. Epub 2021 Jun 15.
2
Development of a New Tool for Evaluating the Benefit of Preventive Treatments for Migraine on Functional Outcomes - The Migraine Functional Impact Questionnaire (MFIQ).开发一种新工具评估偏头痛预防性治疗对功能结局的获益 - 偏头痛功能影响问卷(MFIQ)。
Headache. 2018 Nov;58(10):1612-1628. doi: 10.1111/head.13420. Epub 2018 Oct 30.
3
The Development and Content Validation of the Sjögren's Related Quality of Life Instrument (SRQoL).干燥综合征相关生活质量量表(SRQoL)的开发与内容效度验证
Rheumatol Ther. 2024 Dec;11(6):1591-1609. doi: 10.1007/s40744-024-00718-6. Epub 2024 Oct 10.
4
Development of Focal Segmental Glomerulosclerosis Patient-Reported Outcome Measures: Symptom Diary and Symptom Impact Questionnaire.局灶节段性肾小球硬化患者报告结局测量工具的开发:症状日记和症状影响问卷。
Am J Kidney Dis. 2017 Oct;70(4):532-540. doi: 10.1053/j.ajkd.2017.04.023. Epub 2017 Jun 26.
5
The Severity of Chronic Cough Diary (SCCD): development and content validation of a novel patient-reported outcome instrument for evaluating the symptom experience of chronic cough.慢性咳嗽日记严重程度表(SCCD):一种评估慢性咳嗽症状体验的新型患者报告结局工具的开发和内容验证。
J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2023 Jul 10;7(1):65. doi: 10.1186/s41687-023-00605-8.
6
Development and psychometric evaluation of the assessment of self-injection questionnaire: an adaptation of the self-injection assessment questionnaire.自我注射问卷评估的开发与心理测量学评价:自我注射评估问卷的改编版
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2020 Nov 4;18(1):355. doi: 10.1186/s12955-020-01606-7.
7
A non-interventional observational study to identify and validate clinical outcome assessments for adults with phenylketonuria for use in clinical trials.一项非干预性观察性研究,旨在识别和验证用于苯丙酮尿症成人患者临床试验的临床结局评估指标。
Mol Genet Metab Rep. 2021 Nov 9;29:100810. doi: 10.1016/j.ymgmr.2021.100810. eCollection 2021 Dec.
8
Qualitative Development and Content Validity of the Non-small Cell Lung Cancer Symptom Assessment Questionnaire (NSCLC-SAQ), A Patient-reported Outcome Instrument.非小细胞肺癌症状评估问卷(NSCLC-SAQ)的质性开发与内容效度:一项患者报告结局工具
Clin Ther. 2016 Apr;38(4):794-810. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2016.03.012. Epub 2016 Apr 1.
9
Psychometric evaluation of a patient-reported outcomes instrument for congenital thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura.先天性血栓性血小板减少性紫癜患者报告结局量表的心理计量学评价。
J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2023 Jul 14;7(1):68. doi: 10.1186/s41687-023-00592-w.
10
Development and Pretesting of a Questionnaire to Assess Patient Experiences and Satisfaction with Medications (PESaM Questionnaire).评估患者用药体验和满意度问卷(PESaM 问卷)的编制和预测试。
Patient. 2017 Oct;10(5):629-642. doi: 10.1007/s40271-017-0234-z.

引用本文的文献

1
Development and Content Validation of the Patient's Qualitative Assessment of Treatment - Real-World (PQAT-RW): An Instrument to Evaluate Benefits and Disadvantages of Treatments in Real-World Settings.患者治疗定性评估-真实世界(PQAT-RW)的开发与内容验证:一种评估真实世界中治疗利弊的工具
Patient Relat Outcome Meas. 2024 Oct 7;15:255-269. doi: 10.2147/PROM.S468623. eCollection 2024.
2
Key Opinion Leaders' Interviews to Inform the Future of Benefit-Risk Planning in the Medical Total Product Life Cycle of Global Pharmaceutical and Medical Device Organizations.关键意见领袖访谈:为全球制药和医疗器械组织的医疗产品全生命周期的获益-风险规划的未来提供信息。
Drug Saf. 2024 Sep;47(9):853-868. doi: 10.1007/s40264-024-01442-4. Epub 2024 Jun 1.

本文引用的文献

1
Development and First Use of the Patient's Qualitative Assessment of Treatment (PQAT) Questionnaire in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus to Explore Individualised Benefit-Harm of Drugs Received During Clinical Studies.《患者对治疗的定性评估(PQAT)问卷在 2 型糖尿病中的开发和首次应用,以探索临床研究中所接受药物的个体化获益-风险》
Drug Saf. 2020 Feb;43(2):119-134. doi: 10.1007/s40264-019-00877-4.
2
The Potential Role of Individual-Level Benefit-Risk Assessment in Treatment Decision Making: A DIA Study Endpoints Community Workstream.个体水平获益-风险评估在治疗决策中的潜在作用:DIA研究终点社区工作流程
Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2019 Sep;53(5):630-638. doi: 10.1177/2168479018807448. Epub 2018 Oct 22.
3
Patient Engagement at a Tipping Point-The Need for Cultural Change Across Patient, Sponsor, and Regulator Stakeholders: Insights From the DIA Conference, "Patient Engagement in Benefit Risk Assessment Throughout the Life Cycle of Medical Products".
患者参与度处于临界点——患者、申办方和监管方利益相关者之间文化变革的必要性:来自DIA会议“医疗产品全生命周期中患者参与获益-风险评估”的见解
Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2016 Sep;50(5):546-553. doi: 10.1177/2168479016662902.
4
Validity and usefulness of a single-item measure of patient-reported bother from side effects of cancer therapy.癌症治疗副作用患者报告的单一项目测量的有效性和有用性。
Cancer. 2018 Mar 1;124(5):991-997. doi: 10.1002/cncr.31133. Epub 2017 Nov 13.
5
Content validity--establishing and reporting the evidence in newly developed patient-reported outcomes (PRO) instruments for medical product evaluation: ISPOR PRO Good Research Practices Task Force report: part 2--assessing respondent understanding.内容效度——在新开发的用于医疗产品评估的患者报告结局(PRO)工具中建立和报告证据:ISPOR PRO 良好研究实践工作组报告:第 2 部分——评估受访者的理解。
Value Health. 2011 Dec;14(8):978-88. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2011.06.013. Epub 2011 Oct 10.
6
Content validity--establishing and reporting the evidence in newly developed patient-reported outcomes (PRO) instruments for medical product evaluation: ISPOR PRO good research practices task force report: part 1--eliciting concepts for a new PRO instrument.内容效度——在新开发的用于医疗产品评估的患者报告结局(PRO)工具中建立和报告证据:ISPOR PRO 良好研究实践工作组报告:第 1 部分——为新 PRO 工具征集概念。
Value Health. 2011 Dec;14(8):967-77. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2011.06.014. Epub 2011 Oct 13.
7
Application of the BRAT framework to case studies: observations and insights.BRAT 框架在案例研究中的应用:观察与见解。
Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2011 Feb;89(2):217-24. doi: 10.1038/clpt.2010.280. Epub 2010 Dec 22.
8
Development of a framework for enhancing the transparency, reproducibility and communication of the benefit-risk balance of medicines.建立一个提高药品效益风险平衡透明度、可重复性及沟通性的框架。
Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2011 Feb;89(2):312-5. doi: 10.1038/clpt.2010.291. Epub 2010 Dec 15.
9
Guidance for industry: patient-reported outcome measures: use in medical product development to support labeling claims: draft guidance.行业指南:患者报告的结局指标:用于医疗产品开发以支持标签声明:指南草案
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2006 Oct 11;4:79. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-4-79.
10
Hierarchical construct validity of the treatment satisfaction questionnaire for medication (TSQM version II) among outpatient pharmacy consumers.门诊药房消费者中药物治疗满意度问卷(TSQM 第二版)的层次结构效度
Value Health. 2005 Nov-Dec;8 Suppl 1:S9-S24. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2005.00066.x.