肥胖症临床试验中临床结果评估和数字健康技术的评估。

IF 2.4 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Iris A Goetz, Carolyn Sutter, Traci Abraham, Chisom Kanu, Kristina S Boye, Tara Symonds
{"title":"肥胖症临床试验中临床结果评估和数字健康技术的评估。","authors":"Iris A Goetz, Carolyn Sutter, Traci Abraham, Chisom Kanu, Kristina S Boye, Tara Symonds","doi":"10.1186/s41687-025-00841-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Clinical trials for obesity have traditionally focused on weight loss and resolution of comorbidities as primary outcomes. However, secondary outcomes, such as the impact of weight reduction on patient experience, like health-related quality of life (HRQoL), have increasingly been recognized as important. Therefore, a review was conducted to determine the Clinical Outcome Assessments (COAs) and Digital Health Technologies (DHTs) used in clinical trials for obesity to assess the patient experience.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Two clinical trial databases (United States & European Union) were reviewed to identify Phase 2-4 clinical trials for obesity (2018-2023). A targeted literature review was also conducted using the OVID database to identify clinical trial for obesity publications which included COAs/DHTs (2010-2023).</p><p><strong>Result: </strong>Trials from the databases (n = 53) and publications (n = 42) were included in data extraction (N = 73). This resulted in identification of 108 COAs, the majority being patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures (n = 83), but also 24 performance outcomes (PerfO) measures, and 1 composite PRO-clinician-reported outcomes (ClinRO) measure, as well as 2 DHTs. The most frequently identified PRO measures were the Short Form 36 and the Impact of Weight on Quality of Life Lite Clinical Trials. Twenty-four PerfO measures were also identified, with the 6-minute walk test being most common. These measures were most often used to construct secondary endpoints, with physical function (PF) being the most frequently specified domain. PRO measures assessing eating-related thoughts/behaviours, physical activity, and disordered eating were also frequently included, although individual measures varied widely across trials.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Review of COAs and DHTs in registered clinical trials and publications for obesity found that PRO measures were the most common type of COA used to develop endpoints with current use of DHTs limited. Specifically, the physical function domain of multidimensional patient-reported outcome measures assessing health-related quality of life were often used to construct secondary endpoints. Further work is warranted to assess how the COAs and DHT data collected in clinical trials are viewed by regulators and payers.</p>","PeriodicalId":36660,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes","volume":"9 1","pages":"23"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11842654/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The evaluation of clinical outcomes assessments and digital health technologies in clinical trials for obesity.\",\"authors\":\"Iris A Goetz, Carolyn Sutter, Traci Abraham, Chisom Kanu, Kristina S Boye, Tara Symonds\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s41687-025-00841-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Clinical trials for obesity have traditionally focused on weight loss and resolution of comorbidities as primary outcomes. However, secondary outcomes, such as the impact of weight reduction on patient experience, like health-related quality of life (HRQoL), have increasingly been recognized as important. Therefore, a review was conducted to determine the Clinical Outcome Assessments (COAs) and Digital Health Technologies (DHTs) used in clinical trials for obesity to assess the patient experience.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Two clinical trial databases (United States & European Union) were reviewed to identify Phase 2-4 clinical trials for obesity (2018-2023). A targeted literature review was also conducted using the OVID database to identify clinical trial for obesity publications which included COAs/DHTs (2010-2023).</p><p><strong>Result: </strong>Trials from the databases (n = 53) and publications (n = 42) were included in data extraction (N = 73). This resulted in identification of 108 COAs, the majority being patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures (n = 83), but also 24 performance outcomes (PerfO) measures, and 1 composite PRO-clinician-reported outcomes (ClinRO) measure, as well as 2 DHTs. The most frequently identified PRO measures were the Short Form 36 and the Impact of Weight on Quality of Life Lite Clinical Trials. Twenty-four PerfO measures were also identified, with the 6-minute walk test being most common. These measures were most often used to construct secondary endpoints, with physical function (PF) being the most frequently specified domain. PRO measures assessing eating-related thoughts/behaviours, physical activity, and disordered eating were also frequently included, although individual measures varied widely across trials.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Review of COAs and DHTs in registered clinical trials and publications for obesity found that PRO measures were the most common type of COA used to develop endpoints with current use of DHTs limited. Specifically, the physical function domain of multidimensional patient-reported outcome measures assessing health-related quality of life were often used to construct secondary endpoints. Further work is warranted to assess how the COAs and DHT data collected in clinical trials are viewed by regulators and payers.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36660,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes\",\"volume\":\"9 1\",\"pages\":\"23\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11842654/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41687-025-00841-0\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41687-025-00841-0","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:肥胖的临床试验传统上关注体重减轻和合并症的解决作为主要结局。然而,次要结果,如体重减轻对患者体验的影响,如健康相关生活质量(HRQoL),越来越被认为是重要的。因此,我们进行了一项综述,以确定临床结果评估(COAs)和数字健康技术(dht)在肥胖临床试验中用于评估患者体验。方法:回顾两个临床试验数据库(美国和欧盟),以确定2018-2023年肥胖的2-4期临床试验。使用OVID数据库进行有针对性的文献综述,以确定包括coa / dht(2010-2023)在内的肥胖出版物的临床试验。结果:数据提取(n = 73)纳入了数据库(n = 53)和出版物(n = 42)的试验。结果确定了108个coa,其中大多数是患者报告的结果(PRO)测量(n = 83),但也有24个表现结果(PerfO)测量,1个综合临床报告结果(ClinRO)测量,以及2个dht。最常见的PRO测量是短表36和体重对生命质量的影响临床试验。还确定了24种PerfO测量方法,其中最常见的是6分钟步行测试。这些措施最常用于构建次要终点,其中物理功能(PF)是最常指定的领域。评估与饮食相关的想法/行为、身体活动和饮食失调的PRO测量也经常被包括在内,尽管各个试验的个体测量差异很大。结论:对已注册的肥胖临床试验和出版物中的COA和dht的回顾发现,在目前dht的使用有限的情况下,PRO测量是最常用的用于建立终点的COA类型。具体来说,评估与健康相关的生活质量的多维度患者报告的结果测量的身体功能域经常被用来构建次要终点。有必要进一步开展工作,以评估监管机构和支付方如何看待临床试验中收集的coa和DHT数据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The evaluation of clinical outcomes assessments and digital health technologies in clinical trials for obesity.

Background: Clinical trials for obesity have traditionally focused on weight loss and resolution of comorbidities as primary outcomes. However, secondary outcomes, such as the impact of weight reduction on patient experience, like health-related quality of life (HRQoL), have increasingly been recognized as important. Therefore, a review was conducted to determine the Clinical Outcome Assessments (COAs) and Digital Health Technologies (DHTs) used in clinical trials for obesity to assess the patient experience.

Methods: Two clinical trial databases (United States & European Union) were reviewed to identify Phase 2-4 clinical trials for obesity (2018-2023). A targeted literature review was also conducted using the OVID database to identify clinical trial for obesity publications which included COAs/DHTs (2010-2023).

Result: Trials from the databases (n = 53) and publications (n = 42) were included in data extraction (N = 73). This resulted in identification of 108 COAs, the majority being patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures (n = 83), but also 24 performance outcomes (PerfO) measures, and 1 composite PRO-clinician-reported outcomes (ClinRO) measure, as well as 2 DHTs. The most frequently identified PRO measures were the Short Form 36 and the Impact of Weight on Quality of Life Lite Clinical Trials. Twenty-four PerfO measures were also identified, with the 6-minute walk test being most common. These measures were most often used to construct secondary endpoints, with physical function (PF) being the most frequently specified domain. PRO measures assessing eating-related thoughts/behaviours, physical activity, and disordered eating were also frequently included, although individual measures varied widely across trials.

Conclusion: Review of COAs and DHTs in registered clinical trials and publications for obesity found that PRO measures were the most common type of COA used to develop endpoints with current use of DHTs limited. Specifically, the physical function domain of multidimensional patient-reported outcome measures assessing health-related quality of life were often used to construct secondary endpoints. Further work is warranted to assess how the COAs and DHT data collected in clinical trials are viewed by regulators and payers.

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
Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes
Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes Health Professions-Health Information Management
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
7.40%
发文量
120
审稿时长
20 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