Suppr超能文献

一项关于儿科血液科医生/肿瘤医生对单患者扩大使用及“尝试权”观点的调查。

A survey of pediatric hematologists/oncologists' perspectives on single patient Expanded Access and Right to Try.

作者信息

Chapman Carolyn Riley, Belli Hayley M, Leach Danielle, Shah Lesha D, Bateman-House Alison

机构信息

Department of Population Health, Division of Medical Ethics, New York University Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA.

Department of Population Health, Division of Biostatistics, New York University Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA.

出版信息

Med Access Point Care. 2021 Apr 19;5:23992026211005991. doi: 10.1177/23992026211005991. eCollection 2021 Jan-Dec.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Physicians in the United States play an essential role guiding patients through single patient pre-approval access (PAA) to investigational medical products via either the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)'s Expanded Access (EA) or the federal Right To Try (RTT) pathways. In this study, we sought to better understand pediatric hematologist/oncologists' attitudes about seeking PAA, on behalf of single patients, to investigational drugs outside of clinical trials.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey was developed and sent to pediatric hematologist/oncologists via St. Baldrick's Foundation's email distribution list.

RESULTS

Of 73 respondents (10.1% of those who received the survey), 56 met eligibility criteria and are included in the analysis. Over 80% ( = 46) had prior experience with single patient PAA. Respondents were most concerned about the unknown risks and benefits of investigational drugs and financial implications of PAA for patients. One hundred percent and 91.1% of respondents indicated a willingness to support patients through EA and RTT pathways, respectively. When asked about their most recent experience with PAA, 40 out of 46 indicated that they used the FDA's EA pathway to seek PAA and 4 out of 46 indicated that they used the RTT pathway. Of 44 respondents who had used the EA or RTT pathway, 43 indicated that the biotechnology or pharmaceutical company they solicited granted access to the requested product.

CONCLUSION

Survey results support other findings suggesting a need for additional physician support and education about PAA and that physicians may have unequal access to information about investigational drugs and concerns about financial implications of PAA for their patients.

摘要

引言

美国的医生在指导患者通过食品药品监督管理局(FDA)的扩大准入(EA)或联邦“尝试权”(RTT)途径,获得用于单例患者的研究性医疗产品的预先批准准入(PAA)方面发挥着重要作用。在本研究中,我们试图更好地了解儿科血液科医生/肿瘤学家对于代表单例患者寻求临床试验之外的研究性药物PAA的态度。

方法

开展了一项横断面调查,并通过圣巴德里克基金会的电子邮件分发列表发送给儿科血液科医生/肿瘤学家。

结果

在73名受访者中(占收到调查问卷者的10.1%),56人符合资格标准并纳入分析。超过80%(n = 46)的人有过单例患者PAA的经验。受访者最担心研究性药物的未知风险和益处以及PAA对患者的财务影响。100%和91.1%的受访者分别表示愿意通过EA和RTT途径支持患者。当被问及他们最近一次PAA的经历时,46人中有40人表示他们使用FDA的EA途径寻求PAA,46人中有4人表示他们使用RTT途径。在44名使用过EA或RTT途径的受访者中,43人表示他们所请求的生物技术或制药公司批准了对所请求产品的准入。

结论

调查结果支持了其他研究结果,表明需要为医生提供更多关于PAA的支持和教育,并且医生在获取研究性药物信息方面可能存在不平等,同时担心PAA对其患者的财务影响。

相似文献

1
A survey of pediatric hematologists/oncologists' perspectives on single patient Expanded Access and Right to Try.
Med Access Point Care. 2021 Apr 19;5:23992026211005991. doi: 10.1177/23992026211005991. eCollection 2021 Jan-Dec.
2
Expanded Access and Right To Try Requests: The Community Oncologist's Experience.
JCO Oncol Pract. 2021 Nov;17(11):e1719-e1727. doi: 10.1200/OP.20.00569. Epub 2021 Apr 22.
3
Perspectives of Academic Oncologists About Offering Expanded Access to Investigational Drugs.
JAMA Netw Open. 2022 Nov 1;5(11):e2239766. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.39766.
5
Single-Patient Expanded Access Requests: IRB Professionals' Experiences and Perspectives.
AJOB Empir Bioeth. 2019 Apr-Jun;10(2):88-99. doi: 10.1080/23294515.2019.1577192. Epub 2019 Apr 9.
6
"I Think It's Been Met With a Shrug:" Oncologists' Views Toward and Experiences With Right-to-Try.
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2021 Jun 1;113(6):735-741. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djaa137.
9
Prescribing unproven cancer drugs: physician perspectives on expanded access and right to try.
J Law Biosci. 2022 Oct 25;9(2):lsac031. doi: 10.1093/jlb/lsac031. eCollection 2022 Jul-Dec.

引用本文的文献

1
Navigating the Expanded Access Pathway to Investigational Drugs as an Academic Oncologist.
JAMA Netw Open. 2023 Feb 1;6(2):e230060. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.0060.
2
Perspectives of Academic Oncologists About Offering Expanded Access to Investigational Drugs.
JAMA Netw Open. 2022 Nov 1;5(11):e2239766. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.39766.

本文引用的文献

1
"I Think It's Been Met With a Shrug:" Oncologists' Views Toward and Experiences With Right-to-Try.
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2021 Jun 1;113(6):735-741. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djaa137.
2
Federal Right to Try: Where Is It Going?
Hastings Cent Rep. 2019 Mar;49(2):26-36. doi: 10.1002/hast.990.
3
Single-Patient Expanded Access Requests: IRB Professionals' Experiences and Perspectives.
AJOB Empir Bioeth. 2019 Apr-Jun;10(2):88-99. doi: 10.1080/23294515.2019.1577192. Epub 2019 Apr 9.
5
Physician perspectives on compassionate use in pediatric oncology.
Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2019 Mar;66(3):e27545. doi: 10.1002/pbc.27545. Epub 2018 Nov 8.
6
Pre-approval Access Terminology: A Cause for Confusion and a Danger to Patients.
Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2017 Jul;51(4):494-500. doi: 10.1177/2168479017696267. Epub 2017 Mar 3.
7
Promoting Patient Interests in Implementing the Federal Right to Try Act.
JAMA. 2018 Sep 4;320(9):869-870. doi: 10.1001/jama.2018.9880.
8
The Federal Right to Try Act of 2017-A Wrong Turn for Access to Investigational Drugs and the Path Forward.
JAMA Intern Med. 2018 Mar 1;178(3):321-322. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2017.8167.
9
Federal Right-to-Try Legislation - Threatening the FDA's Public Health Mission.
N Engl J Med. 2018 Feb 22;378(8):695-697. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1714054. Epub 2018 Jan 10.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验