Suppr超能文献

二十多年来提交给 NICE 技术评估的数据质量评估。

Assessment of quality of data submitted for NICE technology appraisals over two decades.

机构信息

The London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK

Consilium Scientific, London, UK.

出版信息

BMJ Open. 2024 Feb 13;14(2):e074341. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-074341.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) pioneered the Health Technology Assessment (HTA) processes and methodologies. Technology appraisals (TAs) focus on pharmaceutical products and clinical and economic data, which are presented by the product manufacturers to the NICE appraisal committee for decision-making. Uncertainty in data reduces the chance of a positive outcome from the HTA process or requires a higher discount.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the quality of clinical data (comparator, quality of life (QoL), randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and overall quality of evidence) submitted by the manufacturers to NICE.

DESIGN

This retrospective evaluation analysed active TAs published between 2000 and 2019 (up to TA600).

METHODS

For all TAs, we extracted data from the Assessment Group and Evidence Review Group reports and Final Appraisal Determinations on (1) the quality of submitted RCTs and (2) the overall quality of evidence submitted for decision-making. For single TAs, we also extracted data and its critique on QoL and comparators. Each category was scored for quality and analysed using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

409 TAs were analysed (multiple technology appraisals (MTA)=104, single technology appraisal (STA)=305). In two-thirds of TAs, the overall quality of evidence was either poor (n=224, 55%) or unacceptable (n=41, 10%). In 39% (n=119) of the STAs, the quality of comparative evidence was considered poor, and in 17% (n=51) unacceptable. In 44% (n=135) of STAs, the quality of QoL data was considered poor, 15% (n=47) unacceptable, 33% (n=102) acceptable and 7% (n=21) as good. Over 20 years of longitudinal analysis did not show improvements in the quality of evidence submitted to NICE.

CONCLUSION

We found that the primary components of clinical evidence influencing NICE's decision-making framework were of poor quality. It is essential to continue to generate robust clinical data for premarket and postmarket introduction of medicines into clinical practice to ensure they deliver benefits to patients.

摘要

背景

国家卫生与保健卓越研究所(NICE)开创了卫生技术评估(HTA)流程和方法。技术评估(TA)侧重于药物产品以及临床和经济数据,这些数据由产品制造商提交给 NICE 评估委员会,供其做出决策。数据的不确定性降低了 HTA 流程产生积极结果的机会,或者需要更高的折扣。

目的

调查制造商向 NICE 提交的临床数据(对照、生活质量(QoL)、随机对照试验(RCT)和总体证据质量)的质量。

设计

这项回顾性评估分析了 2000 年至 2019 年期间(截至 TA600)发布的所有主动 TA。

方法

对于所有 TA,我们从评估小组和证据审查小组报告以及最终评估决定中提取数据,内容涉及(1)提交的 RCT 质量和(2)提交用于决策的总体证据质量。对于单个 TA,我们还提取了 QoL 和对照物的数据及其评论。每个类别都根据质量进行评分,并使用描述性统计进行分析。

结果

分析了 409 个 TA(多技术评估(MTA)=104,单一技术评估(STA)=305)。在三分之二的 TA 中,证据的总体质量要么较差(n=224,55%),要么不可接受(n=41,10%)。在 39%(n=119)的 STA 中,对照证据的质量被认为较差,在 17%(n=51)的 STA 中不可接受。在 44%(n=135)的 STA 中,QoL 数据的质量被认为较差,在 15%(n=47)的 STA 中不可接受,在 33%(n=102)的 STA 中可接受,在 7%(n=21)的 STA 中为良好。20 多年的纵向分析并未显示提交给 NICE 的证据质量有所改善。

结论

我们发现,影响 NICE 决策框架的临床证据的主要组成部分质量较差。必须继续生成稳健的临床数据,以便在药品上市前和上市后引入临床实践,以确保它们为患者带来益处。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7557/10870012/75db4278e503/bmjopen-2023-074341f01.jpg

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