Generating Relevant Information from Patients in the Technology-Enhanced Era of Patient-Focused Drug Development: Opportunities and Challenges.
Journal
The patient
ISSN: 1178-1661
Titre abrégé: Patient
Pays: New Zealand
ID NLM: 101309314
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 2021
01 2021
Historique:
accepted:
08
09
2020
pubmed:
14
10
2020
medline:
11
11
2021
entrez:
13
10
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The era of patient-focused drug development (PFDD) brings with it a greater use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in clinical trials. This is facilitated through electronic technology designed to capture PROM data. However, PFDD goes beyond just PROMs, and technology has a key role in capturing timely and patient-relevant information through active and passive means to inform study endpoints. This brief paper aims to highlight four trends the authors have observed across the pharmaceutical industry in using technology to enhance PFDD: (1) capturing qualitative data from patients; (2) using digital health technology tools (DHTTs); (3) employing reactive technology-enabled clinical outcome assessments TeCOA; and (4) generating passive patient experience data. Opportunities and challenges associated with these trends are discussed, and a 'call to action' is made to consolidate learning and understanding across science, medical and technology disciplines, and to conduct collaborative research to improve the opportunities and minimize the challenges.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33047221
doi: 10.1007/s40271-020-00455-2
pii: 10.1007/s40271-020-00455-2
doi:
Substances chimiques
Pharmaceutical Preparations
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
11-16Références
US Department of Health and Human Services, US FDA. Guidance for industry patient-reported outcome measures: use in medical product development to support labeling claims. Secondary guidance for industry patient-reported outcome measures: use in medical product development to support labeling claims 2009. https://www.fda.gov/media/77832/download .
Mercieca-Bebber R, King MT, Calvert MJ, Stockler MR, Friedlander M. The importance of patient-reported outcomes in clinical trials and strategies for future optimization. Patient Relat Outcome Meas. 2018;9:353–67.
doi: 10.2147/PROM.S156279
Stone AA, Shiffman S, Schwartz JE, Broderick JE, Hufford MR. Patient non-compliance with paper diaries. BMJ. 2002;324:1193–4.
doi: 10.1136/bmj.324.7347.1193
US Department of Health and Human Services, US FDA. (Draft) Guidance for industry, food and drug administration staff, and other stakeholders: patient-focused drug development: methods to identify what is important to patients. Secondary (draft) guidance for industry, food and drug administration staff, and other stakeholders: patient-focused drug development: methods to identify what is important to patients 2019. https://www.fda.gov/media/131230/download .
Chung AE, Shoenbill K, Mitchell SA, Dueck AC, Schrag D, Bruner DW, et al. Patient free text reporting of symptomatic adverse events in cancer clinical research using the National Cancer Institute’s Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE). J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2019;26(4):276–85.
doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocy169
Gater A, Reaney M, Findley A, Brun-Strang C, Burrows K, Nguyên-Pascal ML, et al. Development and first use of the Patient’s Qualitative Assessment of Treatment (PQAT) questionnaire in type 2 diabetes mellitus to explore individualised benefit-harm of drugs received during clinical studies. Drug Saf. 2020;43(2):119–34.
doi: 10.1007/s40264-019-00877-4
Johnson R, Christensen L. Educational research: quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc.; 2017.
Yin R. Qualitative research from start to finish. 2nd ed. New York: Guilford Press; 2016.
Chen X, Xie H, Cheng G, Poon LKM, Leng M, Wang FL. Trends and features of the applications of natural language processing techniques for clinical trials text analysis. Appl Sci. 2020;10(6):2157.
doi: 10.3390/app10062157
Falissard B, Simpson EL, Guttman-Yassky E, Papp KA, Barbarot S, Gadkari A, et al. Qualitative assessment of adult patients’ perception of atopic dermatitis using natural language processing analysis in a cross-sectional study. Dermatol Ther. 2020;10:297–305.
doi: 10.1007/s13555-020-00356-0
Banerjee AK, Okun S, Edwards IR, Wicks P, Smith MY, Mayall SJ, et al. Patient-Reported Outcomes Safety Event Reporting (PROSPER) consortium. Patient-reported outcome measures in safety event reporting: PROSPER consortium guidance. Drug Saf. 2013;36(12):1129–49.
doi: 10.1007/s40264-013-0113-z
Kim J, Singh H, Ayalew K, Borror K, Campbell M, Johnson LL, et al. Use of PRO measures to inform tolerability in oncology trials: implications for clinical review, IND safety reporting, and clinical site inspections. Clin Cancer Res. 2018;24(8):1780–4.
doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-17-2555
Bush E, Ballinger R, Keefe R, Andrews J. Assessing the Content validity of performance outcome (PerfO) measures. Secondary assessing the content validity of performance outcome (PerfO) measures. 2016. https://c-path.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/2016_session2_assessingcontentvalidityperfo_measures.pdf .
Perry B, Herrington W, Goldsack JC, Grandinetti CA, Vasisht KP, Landray MJ, et al. Use of mobile devices to measure outcomes in clinical research, 2010–2016: a systematic literature review. Digit Biomark. 2018;2:11–30.
doi: 10.1159/000486347
Walton MK, Cappelleri JC, Byrom B, Goldsack JC, Eremenco S, Harris D, et al. Considerations for development of an evidence dossier to support the use of mobile sensor technology for clinical outcome assessments in clinical trials. Contemp Clin Trials. 2020;91:105962.
doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2020.105962
Byrom B, Watson C, Doll H, et al. Selection of and evidentiary considerations for wearable devices and their measurements for use in regulatory decision making: recommendations from the ePRO consortium. Value Health. 2018;21(6):631–9.
doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2017.09.012
MacDonald G. Novel endpoints in the digital age. Secondary Novel endpoints in the digital age. 2019. http://www.pmlive.com/pharma_intelligence/Novel_endpoints_in_the_digital_age_1318755 .
Marra C, Chen JL, Coracos A, Stern AD. Quantifying the use of connected digital products in clinical research. NPJ Digit. Med. 2020;3:50.
doi: 10.1038/s41746-020-0259-x
Kyte D, Ives J, Draper H, Calvert M. Management of patient-reported outcome (PRO) alerts in clinical trials: a cross sectional survey. PLoS One. 2016;11(1):e0144658.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0144658
Izmailova ES, Wagner JA, Perakslis ED. Wearable devices in clinical trials: hype and hypothesis. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2018;104(1):42–52.
doi: 10.1002/cpt.966