Real-World Data and Randomised Controlled Trials: The Salford Lung Study.
Androstadienes
/ therapeutic use
Benzyl Alcohols
/ therapeutic use
Bronchodilator Agents
/ therapeutic use
Chlorobenzenes
/ therapeutic use
Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic
/ methods
Double-Blind Method
Drug Therapy, Combination
Electronic Health Records
Health Behavior
Humans
Patient Selection
Product Surveillance, Postmarketing
/ methods
Prospective Studies
Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive
/ drug therapy
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
/ methods
Reproducibility of Results
Asthma
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
Effectiveness
Fluticasone furoate/vilanterol
Primary care
Randomised controlled trial
Real world
Salford Lung Study
Usual care
Journal
Advances in therapy
ISSN: 1865-8652
Titre abrégé: Adv Ther
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8611864
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
03 2020
03 2020
Historique:
received:
24
07
2019
pubmed:
14
1
2020
medline:
21
10
2020
entrez:
14
1
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Traditional efficacy double-blind randomised controlled trials (DBRCTs) measure the benefit a treatment produces under near-ideal test conditions in highly selected patient populations; however, the behaviour of patients and investigators in such trials is highly controlled, highly compliant and adherent, and non-representative of routine clinical practice. Pragmatic effectiveness trials measure the benefit a treatment produces in patients in everyday "real-world" practice. Ideally, effectiveness trials should recruit patients as similar as possible to those who will ultimately be prescribed the medicine, and create freedom within the study design to allow normal behaviours of patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs) to be expressed. The Salford Lung Study (SLS) was a world-first, prospective, phase III, pragmatic randomised controlled trial (RCT) programme in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and asthma to evaluate the effectiveness of a pre-licensed medication (fluticasone furoate/vilanterol) in real-world practice using electronic health records and through collaboratively engaging general practitioners and community pharmacists in clinical research. The real-world aspect of SLS was unique, requiring careful planning and attention to the goals of maximising the external validity of the trials while maintaining scientific rigour and securing suitable electronic processes for proper interpretation of safety data. Key learnings from SLS that may inform the design of future pragmatic effectiveness RCTs include: (1) ensuring the trial setting and operational infrastructure are aligned with routine clinical care; (2) recruiting a broad patient population with characteristics as close as possible to patients in routine clinical practice, to maximise the generalisability and applicability of trial results; (3) ensuring that patients and HCPs are suitably engaged in the trial, to maximise the chances of successful trial delivery; and (4) careful study design, incorporating outcomes of value to patients, HCPs, policymakers and payers, and using pre-planned analyses to address scientifically valid research hypotheses to ensure robustness of the trial data.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31927698
doi: 10.1007/s12325-019-01192-1
pii: 10.1007/s12325-019-01192-1
pmc: PMC7147238
doi:
Substances chimiques
Androstadienes
0
Benzyl Alcohols
0
Bronchodilator Agents
0
Chlorobenzenes
0
vilanterol
028LZY775B
fluticasone furoate
JS86977WNV
Banques de données
figshare
['10.6084/m9.figshare.11336171']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Pagination
977-997Références
Respir Med. 2005 Jan;99(1):11-9
pubmed: 15672843
J Asthma. 2019 Jul;56(7):748-757
pubmed: 29972089
Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2017 Mar;26(3):344-352
pubmed: 27804174
Thorax. 2007 Mar;62(3):219-23
pubmed: 17105779
Lancet. 2017 Nov 18;390(10109):2247-2255
pubmed: 28903864
Clin Trials. 2012 Aug;9(4):436-46
pubmed: 22752634
Adv Ther. 2017 Jun;34(6):1466-1481
pubmed: 28536998
PLoS One. 2014 Mar 05;9(3):e90145
pubmed: 24598945
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2017 Jun 1;195(11):1420-1422
pubmed: 28569577
Value Health. 2012 Mar-Apr;15(2):217-30
pubmed: 22433752
Eur Respir J. 2018 Feb 21;51(2):
pubmed: 29467200
Respir Med. 2018 Aug;141:198-206
pubmed: 30053967
Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2016 Nov 25;11:2885-2895
pubmed: 27932872
J Clin Epidemiol. 2017 Sep;89:173-180
pubmed: 28502808
Thorax. 2014 Dec;69(12):1152-4
pubmed: 24603195
Respir Med. 2019 Feb;147:58-65
pubmed: 30704700
J Clin Epidemiol. 2017 Aug;88:14-20
pubmed: 28502811
Pulm Pharmacol Ther. 2014 Apr;27(2):129-38
pubmed: 24468677
Int J Pharm Pract. 2020 Oct;28(5):529-533
pubmed: 32589297
NPJ Prim Care Respir Med. 2017 Dec 15;27(1):66
pubmed: 29247229
NPJ Prim Care Respir Med. 2019 Aug 15;29(1):31
pubmed: 31417102
Respir Res. 2015 Sep 04;16:101
pubmed: 26337978
Respir Res. 2016 Sep 23;17(1):120
pubmed: 27663386
Trials. 2015 Nov 03;16:495
pubmed: 26530985
ERJ Open Res. 2020 Mar 16;6(1):
pubmed: 32201688
Respiration. 2014;87(1):11-7
pubmed: 24281343
BMC Pulm Med. 2015 Dec 10;15:160
pubmed: 26651333
N Engl J Med. 2016 Sep 29;375(13):1253-60
pubmed: 27593504
NPJ Prim Care Respir Med. 2019 May 9;29(1):20
pubmed: 31073124
BMJ Open Respir Res. 2018 Oct 25;5(1):e000339
pubmed: 30397486
J Clin Epidemiol. 2017 Aug;88:7-13
pubmed: 28549929