International guidance on the selection of patient-reported outcome measures in clinical trials: a review

被引:42
|
作者
Crossnohere, Norah L. [1 ]
Brundage, Michael [2 ]
Calvert, Melanie J. [3 ,4 ]
King, Madeleine [5 ]
Reeve, Bryce B. [6 ]
Thorner, Elissa [7 ]
Wu, Albert W. [1 ,8 ]
Snyder, Claire [1 ,7 ,8 ]
机构
[1] Johns Hopkins Bloomberg Sch Publ Hlth, Baltimore, MD 21205 USA
[2] Queens Univ, Queens Canc Res Inst, Kingston, ON, Canada
[3] Univ Birmingham, Inst Appl Hlth Res, Ctr Patient Reported Outcomes Res CPROR, Birmingham Biomed Res Ctr, Birmingham, W Midlands, England
[4] Univ Birmingham, Birmingham Biomed Res Ctr, NIHR, Birmingham, W Midlands, England
[5] Univ Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
[6] Duke Univ, Sch Med, Durham, NC USA
[7] Johns Hopkins Sidney Kimmel Comprehens Canc Ctr, Baltimore, MD USA
[8] Johns Hopkins Sch Med, Baltimore, MD USA
关键词
Outcome assessment; Quality of life; Guidance as topic; Health care; Clinical trials; Oncology; QUALITY-OF-LIFE; TASK-FORCE REPORT; CONTENT VALIDITY; PRO INSTRUMENTS; SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS; DRUG DEVELOPMENT; RECOMMENDATIONS; CHECKLIST; TRANSLATION; PRINCIPLES;
D O I
10.1007/s11136-020-02625-z
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Purpose Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are increasingly used in clinical trials to provide patients' perspectives regarding symptoms, health-related quality of life, and satisfaction with treatments. A range of guidance documents exist for the selection of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in clinical trials, and it is unclear to what extent these documents present consistent recommendations. Methods We conducted a targeted review of publications and regulatory guidance documents that advise on the selection of PROMs for use in clinical trials. A total of seven guidance documents from the US Food and Drug Administration, European Medicines Agency, and scientific consortia from professional societies were included in the final review. Guidance documents were analyzed using a content analysis approach comparing them with minimum standards recommended by the International Society for Quality of Life Research. Results Overall there was substantial agreement between guidance regarding the appropriate considerations for PROM selection within a clinical trial. Variations among the guidance primarily related to differences in their format and differences in the perspectives and mandates of their respective organizations. Whereas scientific consortia tended to produce checklist or rating-type guidance, regulatory groups tended to use more narrative-based approaches sometimes supplemented with lists of criteria. Conclusion The consistency in recommendations suggests an emerging consensus in the field and supports use of any of the major guidance documents available to guide PROM selection for clinical trials without concern of conflicting recommendations. This work represents an important first step in the international PROTEUS Consortium's ongoing efforts to optimize the use of PROs in clinical trials.
引用
收藏
页码:21 / 40
页数:20
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Results from patient-reported outcome measures are inconsistently reported in inguinal hernia trials: a systematic review
    A. Gram-Hanssen
    C. Christophersen
    J. Rosenberg
    Hernia, 2022, 26 : 687 - 699
  • [42] Individualised patient-reported outcome measures: A systematic review
    Gangannagaripalli, Jaheeda
    Porter, Ian
    Bradley, Daniela G.
    Ricci-Cabello, Ignacio
    Valderas, Jose M.
    QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2017, 26 (01) : 68 - 69
  • [43] Patient-reported outcome measures for retinoblastoma: a scoping review
    Ana Janic
    Sylvie Bowden
    Sarah Levy
    Jennifer Stinson
    Helen Dimaras
    Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes, 4
  • [44] Results from patient-reported outcome measures are inconsistently reported in inguinal hernia trials: a systematic review
    Gram-Hanssen, A.
    Christophersen, C.
    Rosenberg, J.
    HERNIA, 2022, 26 (03) : 687 - 699
  • [45] Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Dermatology: A Systematic Review
    Pattinson, Rachael L.
    Trialonis-Suthakharan, Nirohshah
    Gupta, Sunnia
    Henry, Alasdair L.
    Lavallee, Jacqueline F.
    Otten, Marina
    Pickles, Timothy
    Courtier, Nick
    Austin, Jennifer
    Janus, Christine
    Augustin, Matthias
    Bundy, Chris
    ACTA DERMATO-VENEREOLOGICA, 2021, 101
  • [46] Patient-reported outcome measures for asthma: a systematic review
    Worth, Allison
    Hammersley, Victoria
    Knibb, Rebecca
    Flokstra-de-Blok, Bertine
    DunnGalvin, Audrey
    Walker, Samantha
    Dubois, Anthony E. J.
    Sheikh, Aziz
    NPJ PRIMARY CARE RESPIRATORY MEDICINE, 2014, 24
  • [47] Patient-reported outcome measures in presbyopia: a literature review
    Sharma, Garima
    Chiva-Razavi, Sima
    Viriato, Daniel
    Naujoks, Christel
    Patalano, Francesco
    Bentley, Sarah
    Findley, Amy
    Johnson, Chloe
    Arbuckle, Rob
    Wolffsohn, James
    BMJ OPEN OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2020, 5 (01):
  • [48] Leveraging Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Optimal Dose Selection in Early Phase Cancer Trials
    Byrom, Bill
    Everhart, Anthony
    Cordero, Paul
    Garratt, Chris
    Meyer, Tim
    JMIR CANCER, 2025, 11
  • [49] Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Routine Pediatric Clinical Care: A Systematic Review
    Bele, Sumedh
    Chugh, Ashton
    Mohamed, Bijan
    Teela, Lorynn
    Haverman, Lotte
    Santana, Maria J.
    FRONTIERS IN PEDIATRICS, 2020, 8
  • [50] The impact of patient-reported outcome measures in clinical practice for pain: a systematic review
    Michelle M. Holmes
    George Lewith
    David Newell
    Jonathan Field
    Felicity L. Bishop
    Quality of Life Research, 2017, 26 : 245 - 257