Combining real-world data with randomized controlled trials results in better information oncology decision making

Author:

Usmanova T. A.1ORCID,Verbitskaya E. V.1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. FSBEI HE I. P. Pavlov SPbSMU MOH Russia

Abstract

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the gold standard for testing the efficacy of cancer therapy. Although the results of clinical trials have high internal validity, their generalizability, that is, the ability to transfer the results to a wide patient population, is limited. Therefore, users and health care workers may experience less effective intervention in real practice than stated in the RCT. There are many reasons for the formation of a gap between efficacy and effectiveness (efficacyeffectiveness gap; EEG), that is, the measure of impact on RCTs and the real-world. These reasons include, for example, different characteristics of patients in the trial and real practice, compliance to treatment, features of medical care, and others. To illustrate this problem, a review of some studies on the estimation of the magnitude and analysis of the possible causes of this gap is presented. In most of the studies cited, EEG was identified, its probable explanations were proposed, and additional estimates were made to establish the contribution of various factors to its magnitude. These publications» authors show that real-world patients are older, have worse functional status, and have a greater number of comorbidities. They are women mostly and are less likely to complete the treatment they have started or move to the next line of therapy, in contrast to participants in RCTs. Additionally, this article proposes various analytical approaches to determine the weight of the main causal factors in the formation of a discrepancy between efficacy and effectiveness, which can be used in the development of the methodology of relevant studies.Knowing the size of the EEG when using different treatment regimens in their region and understanding the extent to which one or another factor can influence the size of this gap, the clinician will be able to predict the effectiveness of treatment and choose the best therapy for a particular patient.

Publisher

Publishing House OKI

Reference29 articles.

1. Mamtani R, Lund J, Hubbard RA. Considering the totality of evidence: Combining real-world data with clinical trial results to better inform decision-making. Pharmacoepidemiol. Drug Saf. Jun. 01, 2021;30 (6):814-6. doi: 10.1002 / pds. 5218

2. Rothwell PM. External validity of randomised controlled trials: «to whom do the results of this trial apply? Lancet (London, England). Jan. 2005;365 (9453):82-93. doi: 10.1016 / S0140–6736 (04) 17670-8

3. Unger JM et al. Comparison of survival outcomes among cancer patients treated in and out of clinical trials. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 2014;106 (3). doi: 10.1093 / JNCI / DJU002

4. European Commission. Enterprise and Industry Directorate General for Health & Consumers. High level pharmaceutical forum 2005-2008: conclusions and recommendations. 2008.

5. Issledovaniya real'noi klinicheskoi praktiki / A. S. Kolbin, D. Yu. Belousov, S. K. Zyryanov, V.V. Omel'yanovskii, D. A. Sychev, A. L. Khokhlov, S. L. Plavinskii, B. K. Romanov, M. V. Zhuravleva, E. V. Verbitskaya, E. A. Vol'skaya, D. A. Rozhdestvenskii, S.V. Glagolev, M. Yu. Frolov, A.V. Rudakova, A.V. Pavlysh, Yu.E. Balykina, A. A. Kurylev, A. V. Ivanov, D.S. Kozlov, S. B. Vasil'chenko, T. I. Galimov, O. A. Loginovskaya, S. A. Mishinova, T. A. Gol'dina, V. A. Bulatov, E.V. Lavrent'eva, V. V. Gorin, L. A. Khudova, V. V. Sekachev, I.V. Efimenko, L.I. Karpenko, A. A. Polikarova. — M.: Izdatel'stvo OKI: Buki Vedi, 2020. — 208 s.: il. — ISBN 978-5-4465-2902-5. — Dostupno po: https://izdat-oki.ru / issledovaniya-realnoj-klinicheskoj-praktiki. [Kolbin AS et al. Real-world data study. — M.: Publishing House OKI: Buki Vedi, 2020. — 208 p.: ill. — ISBN 978-5-4465-2902-5].

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3