Concepts of Designing and Implementing Pharmacoepidemiology Studies on the Safety of Systemic Treatments in Dermatology Practice

Sebastian Schneeweiss , Maria Schneeweiss
{"title":"Concepts of Designing and Implementing Pharmacoepidemiology Studies on the Safety of Systemic Treatments in Dermatology Practice","authors":"Sebastian Schneeweiss ,&nbsp;Maria Schneeweiss","doi":"10.1016/j.xjidi.2023.100226","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The U.S. Food and Drug Administration and clinical guidelines use evidence from pharmacoepidemiology studies to inform prescribing decisions and fill evidence gaps left by randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The long-term safety and infrequent adverse reactions are not well-understood when RCTs are short and involve few patients, as is the case for most systemic immunomodulating drugs in dermatology. A better understanding of the design and implementation of pharmacoepidemiology studies will help practitioners assess the accuracy of etiologic findings and use them with confidence in clinical practice. Conducting pharmacoepidemiology studies follows a structured approach, which we discuss in this article: (i) a design layer connects the research question with the appropriate study design, and considering which hypothetical RCT one ideally would want to conduct reduces inadvertent investigator errors; (ii) a measurement layer transforms longitudinal patient-level data into variables that identify the study population, patient characteristics, treatment, and outcomes; and (iii) the analysis focuses on the causal treatment effect estimation. The review and interpretation of pharmacoepidemiology studies should consider issues beyond a typical review of RCTs, chiefly the lack of baseline randomization and the use of secondary data. Well-designed and well-conducted pharmacoepidemiologic studies complement dermatology practice with critical information on prescribing systemic medications.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":73548,"journal":{"name":"JID innovations : skin science from molecules to population health","volume":"3 6","pages":"Article 100226"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/6e/30/main.PMC10514213.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JID innovations : skin science from molecules to population health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667026723000528","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration and clinical guidelines use evidence from pharmacoepidemiology studies to inform prescribing decisions and fill evidence gaps left by randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The long-term safety and infrequent adverse reactions are not well-understood when RCTs are short and involve few patients, as is the case for most systemic immunomodulating drugs in dermatology. A better understanding of the design and implementation of pharmacoepidemiology studies will help practitioners assess the accuracy of etiologic findings and use them with confidence in clinical practice. Conducting pharmacoepidemiology studies follows a structured approach, which we discuss in this article: (i) a design layer connects the research question with the appropriate study design, and considering which hypothetical RCT one ideally would want to conduct reduces inadvertent investigator errors; (ii) a measurement layer transforms longitudinal patient-level data into variables that identify the study population, patient characteristics, treatment, and outcomes; and (iii) the analysis focuses on the causal treatment effect estimation. The review and interpretation of pharmacoepidemiology studies should consider issues beyond a typical review of RCTs, chiefly the lack of baseline randomization and the use of secondary data. Well-designed and well-conducted pharmacoepidemiologic studies complement dermatology practice with critical information on prescribing systemic medications.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

设计和实施皮肤内科系统治疗安全性药物流行病学研究的概念
美国食品药品监督管理局和临床指南使用药物流行病学研究的证据来为处方决策提供信息,并填补随机对照试验留下的证据空白。当随机对照试验时间短且涉及的患者很少时,长期安全性和罕见不良反应就不太清楚了,皮肤病学中大多数全身免疫调节药物也是如此。更好地了解药物流行病学研究的设计和实施将有助于从业者评估病因发现的准确性,并在临床实践中充满信心地使用这些发现。进行药物流行病学研究遵循一种结构化的方法,我们在本文中对此进行了讨论:(i)设计层将研究问题与适当的研究设计联系起来,并考虑理想情况下要进行哪种假设的随机对照试验,以减少研究者无意中的错误;(ii)测量层将纵向患者水平数据转换为识别研究人群、患者特征、治疗和结果的变量;以及(iii)分析侧重于因果治疗效果的估计。药物流行病学研究的审查和解释应考虑随机对照试验典型审查之外的问题,主要是缺乏基线随机化和使用次要数据。精心设计和实施的药物流行病学研究为皮肤科实践提供了关于开具全身药物处方的关键信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信