Suppr超能文献

评估慢性疼痛临床试验中的获益与危害平衡:优先考虑个体参与者而非个体结局。

Evaluating the balance of benefits and harms in chronic pain clinical trials: prioritizing individual participants over individual outcomes.

机构信息

Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York, USA.

Anesthesiology, Critical Care & Pain Management, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, New York, USA.

出版信息

Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2024 May 7;49(5):363-367. doi: 10.1136/rapm-2023-104809.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) generally assess efficacy and safety separately, with the conclusion of whether a treatment is beneficial based solely on the efficacy endpoint. However, assessing and combining efficacy and safety domains, using a single composite outcome measure, can provide a more comprehensive assessment of the overall effect of a treatment. Furthermore, composite outcomes can incorporate information regarding the relationship between the individual outcomes. In fact, such outcomes have been suggested in the clinical trials literature for at least 15 years.

OBJECTIVES

To (1) identify whether recent primary publications of chronic pain RCTs from major pain journals included a composite outcome measure of benefits and harms and (2) discuss the potential benefits of such outcomes in various stages of treatment development, including as outcome measures in RCTs, and to support decisions of Data and Safety Monitoring Boards and ordering of treatments in the context of treatment guidelines.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

RCTs published in 6 major pain journals published between 2016 and 2021 that investigated interventions for chronic pain were reviewed.

FINDINGS

Of 73 RCTs identified, only 2 included a composite outcome measure of benefits and harms. Both of these articles compared 2 active treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

Composite outcomes of benefits and harms are underutilized in chronic pain RCTs. The advantages and challenges of using such outcomes are discussed.

摘要

背景

随机临床试验(RCT)通常分别评估疗效和安全性,仅根据疗效终点来判断治疗是否有益。然而,评估和综合疗效和安全性领域,使用单一的综合结果衡量标准,可以更全面地评估治疗的整体效果。此外,综合结果可以纳入关于个体结果之间关系的信息。事实上,此类结果在临床试验文献中已经被提出至少 15 年了。

目的

(1)确定主要疼痛期刊最近发表的慢性疼痛 RCT 中是否包含了疗效和安全性的综合结果衡量标准,(2)讨论此类结果在治疗开发的各个阶段的潜在益处,包括作为 RCT 的结果衡量标准,以及支持数据和安全监测委员会的决策和治疗指南背景下的治疗顺序。

证据回顾

对 2016 年至 2021 年期间发表在 6 种主要疼痛期刊上的 RCT 进行了回顾。

发现

在确定的 73 项 RCT 中,只有 2 项包含了疗效和安全性的综合结果衡量标准。这两篇文章都比较了两种积极的治疗方法。

结论

在慢性疼痛 RCT 中,疗效和安全性的综合结果衡量标准的使用不足。讨论了使用此类结果的优点和挑战。

相似文献

3
The future of Cochrane Neonatal.
Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12.
4
Psychological therapies (remotely delivered) for the management of chronic and recurrent pain in children and adolescents.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Apr 2;4(4):CD011118. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011118.pub3.
5
Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for pain management in sickle cell disease.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Mar 3;3(3):CD012762. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012762.pub2.
7
Psychological therapies for the management of chronic and recurrent pain in children and adolescents.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Sep 29;9(9):CD003968. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003968.pub5.
8
Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for chronic pain - an overview of Cochrane Reviews.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Apr 3;4(4):CD011890. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011890.pub3.
9
Psychological therapies for the management of chronic and recurrent pain in children and adolescents.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 May 5;2014(5):CD003968. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003968.pub4.
10
Psychological therapies (remotely delivered) for the management of chronic and recurrent pain in children and adolescents.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Mar 23;3(3):CD011118. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011118.pub2.

引用本文的文献

1
Validation of a holistic composite outcome measure for the evaluation of chronic pain interventions.
Pain Rep. 2024 Oct 14;9(6):e1202. doi: 10.1097/PR9.0000000000001202. eCollection 2024 Dec.
2
Development and validation of a drug clinical trial participation feelings questionnaire for cancer patients.
Front Pharmacol. 2024 Jun 18;15:1371811. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2024.1371811. eCollection 2024.

本文引用的文献

1
The Data and Safety Monitoring Board: The Toughest Job in Clinical Trials.
NEJM Evid. 2023 Feb;2(2):EVIDctw2200220. doi: 10.1056/EVIDctw2200220. Epub 2023 Jan 24.
2
Independent Oversight of Clinical Trials through Data and Safety Monitoring Boards.
NEJM Evid. 2022 Jan;1(1):EVIDctw2100005. doi: 10.1056/EVIDctw2100005. Epub 2022 Jan 10.
3
Multimethod quantitative benefit-risk assessment of treatments for moderate-to-severe osteoarthritis.
Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2022 Aug;88(8):3837-3846. doi: 10.1111/bcp.15309. Epub 2022 Apr 8.
5
Benefit-risk assessment and reporting in clinical trials of chronic pain treatments: IMMPACT recommendations.
Pain. 2022 Jun 1;163(6):1006-1018. doi: 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000002475. Epub 2021 Sep 9.
7
The Net Benefit of a treatment should take the correlation between benefits and harms into account.
J Clin Epidemiol. 2021 Sep;137:148-158. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.03.018. Epub 2021 Mar 24.
8
Composite outcomes for pain clinical trials: considerations for design and interpretation.
Pain. 2021 Jul 1;162(7):1899-1905. doi: 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000002188.
9
Patient preferences for osteoarthritis pain and chronic low back pain treatments in the United States: a discrete-choice experiment.
Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2020 Sep;28(9):1202-1213. doi: 10.1016/j.joca.2020.06.006. Epub 2020 Jul 8.
10
Presenting Risks and Benefits: Helping the Data Monitoring Committee Do Its Job.
Ann Intern Med. 2020 Jan 21;172(2):119-125. doi: 10.7326/M19-1491. Epub 2019 Nov 19.

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