真实世界证据研究中的估计

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q3 MATHEMATICAL & COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY
Jie Chen, Daniel Scharfstein, Hongwei Wang, Binbing Yu, Yang Song, Weili He, John Scott, Xiwu Lin, Hana Lee
{"title":"真实世界证据研究中的估计","authors":"Jie Chen, Daniel Scharfstein, Hongwei Wang, Binbing Yu, Yang Song, Weili He, John Scott, Xiwu Lin, Hana Lee","doi":"10.1080/19466315.2023.2259829","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"AbstractA Real-World Evidence (RWE) Scientific Working Group (SWG) of the American Statistical Association Biopharmaceutical Section (ASA BIOP) has been reviewing statistical considerations for the generation of RWE to support regulatory decision-making. As part of the effort, the working group is addressing estimands in RWE studies. Constructing the right estimand—the target of estimation—which reflects the research question and the study objective, is one of the key components in formulating a clinical study. ICH E9(R1) describes statistical principles for constructing estimands in clinical trials with a focus on five attributes—population, treatment, endpoints, intercurrent events, and population-level summary. However, defining estimands for clinical studies using real-world data (RWD), i.e., RWE studies, requires additional considerations due to, for example, heterogeneity of study population, complexity of treatment regimes, different types and patterns of intercurrent events, and complexities in choosing study endpoints. This paper reviews the essential components of estimands and causal inference framework, discusses considerations in constructing estimands for RWE studies, highlights similarities and differences in traditional clinical trial and RWE study estimands, and provides a roadmap for choosing appropriate estimands for RWE studies.Key words: Real-world evidencereal-world dataestimandestimand frameworkDisclaimerAs a service to authors and researchers we are providing this version of an accepted manuscript (AM). Copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proofs will be undertaken on this manuscript before final publication of the Version of Record (VoR). During production and pre-press, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal relate to these versions also. FundingThe author(s) reported there is no funding associated with the work featured in this article.","PeriodicalId":51280,"journal":{"name":"Statistics in Biopharmaceutical Research","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Estimands in Real-World Evidence Studies\",\"authors\":\"Jie Chen, Daniel Scharfstein, Hongwei Wang, Binbing Yu, Yang Song, Weili He, John Scott, Xiwu Lin, Hana Lee\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/19466315.2023.2259829\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"AbstractA Real-World Evidence (RWE) Scientific Working Group (SWG) of the American Statistical Association Biopharmaceutical Section (ASA BIOP) has been reviewing statistical considerations for the generation of RWE to support regulatory decision-making. As part of the effort, the working group is addressing estimands in RWE studies. Constructing the right estimand—the target of estimation—which reflects the research question and the study objective, is one of the key components in formulating a clinical study. ICH E9(R1) describes statistical principles for constructing estimands in clinical trials with a focus on five attributes—population, treatment, endpoints, intercurrent events, and population-level summary. However, defining estimands for clinical studies using real-world data (RWD), i.e., RWE studies, requires additional considerations due to, for example, heterogeneity of study population, complexity of treatment regimes, different types and patterns of intercurrent events, and complexities in choosing study endpoints. This paper reviews the essential components of estimands and causal inference framework, discusses considerations in constructing estimands for RWE studies, highlights similarities and differences in traditional clinical trial and RWE study estimands, and provides a roadmap for choosing appropriate estimands for RWE studies.Key words: Real-world evidencereal-world dataestimandestimand frameworkDisclaimerAs a service to authors and researchers we are providing this version of an accepted manuscript (AM). Copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proofs will be undertaken on this manuscript before final publication of the Version of Record (VoR). During production and pre-press, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal relate to these versions also. FundingThe author(s) reported there is no funding associated with the work featured in this article.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51280,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Statistics in Biopharmaceutical Research\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Statistics in Biopharmaceutical Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/19466315.2023.2259829\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MATHEMATICAL & COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Statistics in Biopharmaceutical Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19466315.2023.2259829","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MATHEMATICAL & COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

美国统计协会生物制药分会(ASA BIOP)的真实世界证据(RWE)科学工作组(SWG)一直在审查RWE生成的统计考虑因素,以支持监管决策。作为努力的一部分,工作组正在处理RWE研究中的估计。构建反映研究问题和研究目的的正确评价指标是制定临床研究的关键组成部分之一。ICH E9(R1)描述了在临床试验中构建估计的统计原则,重点关注五个属性——群体、治疗、终点、并发事件和群体水平总结。然而,使用真实世界数据(RWD)(即RWE研究)定义临床研究的估计需要额外考虑,例如,研究人群的异质性,治疗方案的复杂性,并发事件的不同类型和模式,以及选择研究终点的复杂性。本文综述了RWE研究估计和因果推理框架的基本组成部分,讨论了构建RWE研究估计的考虑因素,强调了传统临床试验和RWE研究估计的异同,并为RWE研究选择合适的估计提供了路线图。关键词:真实世界证据真实世界数据估计需求和框架免责声明作为对作者和研究人员的服务,我们提供此版本的已接受手稿(AM)。在最终出版版本记录(VoR)之前,将对该手稿进行编辑、排版和审查。在制作和印前,可能会发现可能影响内容的错误,所有适用于期刊的法律免责声明也与这些版本有关。作者报告说,没有与本文所述工作相关的资金。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Estimands in Real-World Evidence Studies
AbstractA Real-World Evidence (RWE) Scientific Working Group (SWG) of the American Statistical Association Biopharmaceutical Section (ASA BIOP) has been reviewing statistical considerations for the generation of RWE to support regulatory decision-making. As part of the effort, the working group is addressing estimands in RWE studies. Constructing the right estimand—the target of estimation—which reflects the research question and the study objective, is one of the key components in formulating a clinical study. ICH E9(R1) describes statistical principles for constructing estimands in clinical trials with a focus on five attributes—population, treatment, endpoints, intercurrent events, and population-level summary. However, defining estimands for clinical studies using real-world data (RWD), i.e., RWE studies, requires additional considerations due to, for example, heterogeneity of study population, complexity of treatment regimes, different types and patterns of intercurrent events, and complexities in choosing study endpoints. This paper reviews the essential components of estimands and causal inference framework, discusses considerations in constructing estimands for RWE studies, highlights similarities and differences in traditional clinical trial and RWE study estimands, and provides a roadmap for choosing appropriate estimands for RWE studies.Key words: Real-world evidencereal-world dataestimandestimand frameworkDisclaimerAs a service to authors and researchers we are providing this version of an accepted manuscript (AM). Copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proofs will be undertaken on this manuscript before final publication of the Version of Record (VoR). During production and pre-press, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal relate to these versions also. FundingThe author(s) reported there is no funding associated with the work featured in this article.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Statistics in Biopharmaceutical Research
Statistics in Biopharmaceutical Research MATHEMATICAL & COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY-STATISTICS & PROBABILITY
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
16.70%
发文量
56
期刊介绍: Statistics in Biopharmaceutical Research ( SBR), publishes articles that focus on the needs of researchers and applied statisticians in biopharmaceutical industries; academic biostatisticians from schools of medicine, veterinary medicine, public health, and pharmacy; statisticians and quantitative analysts working in regulatory agencies (e.g., U.S. Food and Drug Administration and its counterpart in other countries); statisticians with an interest in adopting methodology presented in this journal to their own fields; and nonstatisticians with an interest in applying statistical methods to biopharmaceutical problems. Statistics in Biopharmaceutical Research accepts papers that discuss appropriate statistical methodology and information regarding the use of statistics in all phases of research, development, and practice in the pharmaceutical, biopharmaceutical, device, and diagnostics industries. Articles should focus on the development of novel statistical methods, novel applications of current methods, or the innovative application of statistical principles that can be used by statistical practitioners in these disciplines. Areas of application may include statistical methods for drug discovery, including papers that address issues of multiplicity, sequential trials, adaptive designs, etc.; preclinical and clinical studies; genomics and proteomics; bioassay; biomarkers and surrogate markers; models and analyses of drug history, including pharmacoeconomics, product life cycle, detection of adverse events in clinical studies, and postmarketing risk assessment; regulatory guidelines, including issues of standardization of terminology (e.g., CDISC), tolerance and specification limits related to pharmaceutical practice, and novel methods of drug approval; and detection of adverse events in clinical and toxicological studies. Tutorial articles also are welcome. Articles should include demonstrable evidence of the usefulness of this methodology (presumably by means of an application). The Editorial Board of SBR intends to ensure that the journal continually provides important, useful, and timely information. To accomplish this, the board strives to attract outstanding articles by seeing that each submission receives a careful, thorough, and prompt review. Authors can choose to publish gold open access in this journal.
×
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