Utilising benefit-risk assessments within clinical trials—a protocol for the BRAINS project

Author:

Totton NikkiORCID,Julious Steven,Hughes Dyfrig,Cook Jonathan,Biggs Katie,Coates Lizzie,Cook Andrew,Hewitt Catherine,Day Simon

Abstract

Abstract Background Depending on the treatment to be investigated, a clinical trial could be designed to assess objectives of superiority, equivalence or non-inferiority. The design of the study is affected by many different elements including the control treatment, the primary outcome and associated relationships. In some studies, there could be more than one outcome of interest. In these situations, benefit-risk methodologies could be used to assess the outcomes simultaneously and consider the trade-off between the benefits against the risks of a treatment. Benefit-risk is used within the regulatory industry but seldom included within publicly funded clinical trials within the UK. This project aims to gain an expert consensus on how to select the appropriate trial design (e.g. superiority) and when to consider including benefit-risk methods. Methods The project will consist of four work packages: A web-based survey to elicit current experiences and opinions, A rapid literature review to assess any current recommendations, A two-day consensus workshop to gain agreement on the recommendations, and Production of a guidance document. Discussion The aim of the project is to provide a guideline for clinical researchers, grant funding bodies and reviewers for grant bodies for how to select the most appropriate trial design and when it is appropriate to consider using benefit-risk methods. The focus of the guideline will be on publicly funded trials however, the vision is that the work will be applicable across research settings and we will connect with other organisations and committees as appropriate.

Funder

Medical Research Council

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

Pharmacology (medical),Medicine (miscellaneous)

Reference19 articles.

1. Lesaffre E. Superiority, equivalence, and non-inferiority trials. Bulletin of the NYU Hospital for Joint Diseases. 2008;66(2):150–4.

2. Schumi J, Wittes TJ. Through the looking glass: understanding non-inferiority. Trials. 2011;12(106):1–12 http://www.trialsjournal.com/content/12/1/106.

3. European Patients’ Academy. Benefit-Risk Assessment - EUPATI [Internet]. [cited 2019 Jul 15]. Available from: https://www.eupati.eu/glossary/benefit-risk-assessment/.

4. Mühlbacher AC, Juhnke C, Beyer AR, Garner S. Patient-focused benefit-risk analysis to inform regulatory decisions: the European Union perspective. Value in Health. 2016;19:734–40.

5. (EMA) EMA. Benefit-risk methodology. [Internet]. [cited 2019 Jul 26]. Available from: https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/about-us/support-research/benefit-risk-methodology

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