从评估框架的角度回顾最近的药物流行病学上市后安全性研究。

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q4 MEDICAL INFORMATICS
Yong Ma, Jonathan Haddad, Wei Liu, Ellen Snyder, Dimitri Bennett, Susan Mayo
{"title":"从评估框架的角度回顾最近的药物流行病学上市后安全性研究。","authors":"Yong Ma, Jonathan Haddad, Wei Liu, Ellen Snyder, Dimitri Bennett, Susan Mayo","doi":"10.1007/s43441-025-00780-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The ICH E9(R1) estimand framework provides a systematic approach to ensure alignment among clinical trial objectives, trial conduct, statistical analyses, and interpretation of results, however, whether it can be readily utilized for the pharmacoepidemiologic safety studies has not been established. We selected articles on drug safety published in the Journal Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety (PDS), during 2020 to investigate whether estimand attributes were well defined in the study design and reporting. We found that among twenty-five articles selected, nineteen were cohort studies and six were nested case-control studies. All studies had well-defined exposure, outcome, target population, and population level summary. The term intercurrent event (ICE) was not mentioned in any of the studies; however, many cohort studies discussed drug discontinuation, treatment modification and terminal events, and strategies to handle them. All studies used methods to control for confounding: propensity score methods or covariate adjustment, or both for cohort studies; matching and covariate adjustment for the nested case-control studies. We conclude that while the estimand framework can serve to add clarity and precision to pharmacoepidemiologic safety studies, more detailed considerations are required for bias assessment to compensate for the lack of randomization and other shortcomings in observational studies. Recent pharmacoepidemiology frameworks, such as Target Trial Emulation, STaRT-RWE, HARPER could be combined with the complementary principals from the estimand framework to help achieve the study objectives.</p>","PeriodicalId":23084,"journal":{"name":"Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science","volume":" ","pages":"971-980"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12446131/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Review of Recent Pharmacoepidemiologic Post-Market Safety Studies Through the Lens of the Estimand Framework.\",\"authors\":\"Yong Ma, Jonathan Haddad, Wei Liu, Ellen Snyder, Dimitri Bennett, Susan Mayo\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s43441-025-00780-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The ICH E9(R1) estimand framework provides a systematic approach to ensure alignment among clinical trial objectives, trial conduct, statistical analyses, and interpretation of results, however, whether it can be readily utilized for the pharmacoepidemiologic safety studies has not been established. We selected articles on drug safety published in the Journal Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety (PDS), during 2020 to investigate whether estimand attributes were well defined in the study design and reporting. We found that among twenty-five articles selected, nineteen were cohort studies and six were nested case-control studies. All studies had well-defined exposure, outcome, target population, and population level summary. The term intercurrent event (ICE) was not mentioned in any of the studies; however, many cohort studies discussed drug discontinuation, treatment modification and terminal events, and strategies to handle them. All studies used methods to control for confounding: propensity score methods or covariate adjustment, or both for cohort studies; matching and covariate adjustment for the nested case-control studies. We conclude that while the estimand framework can serve to add clarity and precision to pharmacoepidemiologic safety studies, more detailed considerations are required for bias assessment to compensate for the lack of randomization and other shortcomings in observational studies. Recent pharmacoepidemiology frameworks, such as Target Trial Emulation, STaRT-RWE, HARPER could be combined with the complementary principals from the estimand framework to help achieve the study objectives.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23084,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"971-980\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12446131/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s43441-025-00780-4\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/5/27 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICAL INFORMATICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s43441-025-00780-4","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/5/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICAL INFORMATICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

ICH E9(R1)评估框架提供了一种系统的方法来确保临床试验目标、试验实施、统计分析和结果解释之间的一致性,然而,它是否可以容易地用于药物流行病学安全性研究尚未确定。我们选择了2020年期间发表在《药物流行病学与药物安全》(PDS)杂志上的关于药物安全性的文章,以调查研究设计和报告中是否明确定义了估计属性。我们发现,在入选的25篇文章中,19篇是队列研究,6篇是巢式病例对照研究。所有的研究都有明确的暴露、结果、目标人群和人群水平总结。任何研究中均未提及“并发事件”(ICE)一词;然而,许多队列研究讨论了药物停药、治疗改变和终末期事件,以及处理这些事件的策略。所有的研究都使用了控制混杂的方法:倾向评分法或协变量调整法,或在队列研究中两者都使用;嵌套病例对照研究的匹配和协变量调整。我们的结论是,虽然估计框架可以增加药物流行病学安全性研究的清晰度和准确性,但偏倚评估需要更详细的考虑,以弥补观察性研究中缺乏随机化和其他缺点。最近的药物流行病学框架,如目标试验模拟、STaRT-RWE、HARPER可以与评估框架中的互补原则相结合,以帮助实现研究目标。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Review of Recent Pharmacoepidemiologic Post-Market Safety Studies Through the Lens of the Estimand Framework.

Review of Recent Pharmacoepidemiologic Post-Market Safety Studies Through the Lens of the Estimand Framework.

Review of Recent Pharmacoepidemiologic Post-Market Safety Studies Through the Lens of the Estimand Framework.

Review of Recent Pharmacoepidemiologic Post-Market Safety Studies Through the Lens of the Estimand Framework.

The ICH E9(R1) estimand framework provides a systematic approach to ensure alignment among clinical trial objectives, trial conduct, statistical analyses, and interpretation of results, however, whether it can be readily utilized for the pharmacoepidemiologic safety studies has not been established. We selected articles on drug safety published in the Journal Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety (PDS), during 2020 to investigate whether estimand attributes were well defined in the study design and reporting. We found that among twenty-five articles selected, nineteen were cohort studies and six were nested case-control studies. All studies had well-defined exposure, outcome, target population, and population level summary. The term intercurrent event (ICE) was not mentioned in any of the studies; however, many cohort studies discussed drug discontinuation, treatment modification and terminal events, and strategies to handle them. All studies used methods to control for confounding: propensity score methods or covariate adjustment, or both for cohort studies; matching and covariate adjustment for the nested case-control studies. We conclude that while the estimand framework can serve to add clarity and precision to pharmacoepidemiologic safety studies, more detailed considerations are required for bias assessment to compensate for the lack of randomization and other shortcomings in observational studies. Recent pharmacoepidemiology frameworks, such as Target Trial Emulation, STaRT-RWE, HARPER could be combined with the complementary principals from the estimand framework to help achieve the study objectives.

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
Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science
Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science MEDICAL INFORMATICS-PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
13.30%
发文量
127
期刊介绍: Therapeutic Innovation & Regulatory Science (TIRS) is the official scientific journal of DIA that strives to advance medical product discovery, development, regulation, and use through the publication of peer-reviewed original and review articles, commentaries, and letters to the editor across the spectrum of converting biomedical science into practical solutions to advance human health. The focus areas of the journal are as follows: Biostatistics Clinical Trials Product Development and Innovation Global Perspectives Policy Regulatory Science Product Safety Special Populations
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信