The Oncology QCARD Initiative: Fostering efficient evaluation of initial real-world data proposals.
data quality
fit‐for‐purpose
observational study design
oncology
real‐world data
real‐world evidence
Journal
Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety
ISSN: 1099-1557
Titre abrégé: Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9208369
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Nov 2024
Nov 2024
Historique:
revised:
16
04
2024
received:
01
02
2024
accepted:
05
05
2024
medline:
28
10
2024
pubmed:
28
10
2024
entrez:
28
10
2024
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The oncology quality, characterization, and assessment of real-world data (Oncology QCARD) Initiative was formed to develop a set of minimum study design and data elements needed to evaluate the fitness of the real-world data (RWD) source(s) proposed in an initial study concept as part of early interaction with scientific reviewers. A multidisciplinary executive committee (EC) was established to guide the Oncology QCARD Initiative. The EC conducted a landscape review of published literature, guidances, and guidelines to evaluate relevant dimensions of data quality measurement. Guided by the review and informed by expert feedback, the Oncology QCARD Initial Protocol Characterization (IPC) provides a summary of minimum elements needed to adequately describe an initial clinical study concept that involves RWD and is intended to support decision-making. Fit-for-use data and fit-for-purpose design emerged as themes from the landscape analysis. Data that are fit-for-use are both relevant (sufficiently capturing exposure, outcomes, and covariates) and reliable (understanding data accrual and quality control and whether the data represent the underlying concepts they are intended to represent) to answer a specific research question. A fit-for-purpose design takes appropriate steps to ensure internal and external validity and allows for transparency in reporting. The QCARD-IPC focuses on high-level characteristics of RWD sources and study design domains including data temporality, population, medical product exposure, comparators, and covariates, endpoints, statistical analysis, and data quality assurance plans. Evaluation of studies including RWD requires understanding the data source, study design, and potential biases to preliminarily evaluate whether selected RWD are fit-for-use for the research question. The Oncology QCARD-IPC provides a structured, transparent approach to facilitate early review and enhanced communication between study sponsors and scientific reviewers of initial study proposals including RWD.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e5818Subventions
Organisme : U.S. Food and Drug Administration
Informations de copyright
© 2024 John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This article has been contributed to by U.S. Government employees and their work is in the public domain in the USA.
Références
21st Century Cures Act. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. ETHICS STATEMENT: Mandatory. https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/selected-amendments-fdc-act/21st-century-cures-act
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Framework for FDA's Real‐World Evidence Program. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services; 2018 https://www.fda.gov/media/120060/download
Brown JS, Mendelsohn AB, Nam YH, et al. The US Food and Drug Administration sentinel system: a national resource for a learning health system. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2022;29(12):2191‐2200. doi:10.1093/jamia/ocac153
Adequate and well‐controlled studies. 21CFR314.126. Code of Federal Regulations. Accessed December 5, 2023 https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/cfrsearch.cfm?fr=314.126
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Demonstrating Substantial Evidence of Effectiveness for Human Drug and Biological Products. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. 2019 https://www.fda.gov/regulatory‐information/search‐fda‐guidance‐documents/demonstrating‐substantial‐evidence‐effectiveness‐human‐drug‐and‐biological‐products
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Demonstrating Substantial Evidence of Effectiveness with One Adequate and Well‐Controlled Clinical Investigation and Confirmatory Evidence. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services; 2023 https://www.fda.gov/regulatory‐information/search‐fda‐guidance‐documents/demonstrating‐substantial‐evidence‐effectiveness‐one‐adequate‐and‐well‐controlled‐clinical
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Real‐World Data: Assessing Electronic Health Records and Medical Claims Data to Support Regulatory Decision‐Making for Drug and Biological Products. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services; 2021 https://www.fda.gov/regulatory‐information/search‐fda‐guidance‐documents/real‐world‐data‐assessing‐electronic‐health‐records‐and‐medical‐claims‐data‐support‐regulatory
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Data Standards for Drug and Biological Product Submissions Containing Real‐World Data.. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services; 2023 https://www.fda.gov/regulatory‐information/search‐fda‐guidance‐documents/data‐standards‐drug‐and‐biological‐product‐submissions‐containing‐real‐world‐data
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Real‐World Data: Assessing Registries to Support Regulatory Decision‐Making for Drug and Biological Products. Guidance for Industry. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services; 2023 https://www.fda.gov/regulatory‐information/search‐fda‐guidance‐documents/real‐world‐data‐assessing‐registries‐support‐regulatory‐decision‐making‐drug‐and‐biological‐products
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Considerations for the Use of Real‐World Data and Real‐World Evidence to Support Regulatory Decision‐Making for Drug and Biological Products. 2023 https://www.fda.gov/regulatory‐information/search‐fda‐guidance‐documents/considerations‐use‐real‐world‐data‐and‐real‐world‐evidence‐support‐regulatory‐decision‐making‐drug
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Submitting Documents Using Real‐World Data and Real‐World Evidence to FDA for Drugs and Biologics. 2022 https://www.fda.gov/regulatory‐information/search‐fda‐guidance‐documents/submitting‐documents‐using‐real‐world‐data‐and‐real‐world‐evidence‐fda‐drug‐and‐biological‐products
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Considerations for the Design and Conduct of Externally Controlled Trials for Drug and Biological Products. 2023 https://www.fda.gov/regulatory‐information/search‐fda‐guidance‐documents/considerations‐design‐and‐conduct‐externally‐controlled‐trials‐drug‐and‐biological‐products
Rivera DR, Henk HJ, Garrett‐Mayer E, et al. The friends of cancer research real‐world data collaboration pilot 2.0: methodological recommendations from oncology case studies. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2022;111(1):283‐292. doi:10.1002/cpt.2453
Thurin NH, Pajouheshnia R, Roberto G, et al. From inception to ConcePTION: genesis of a network to support better monitoring and communication of medication safety during pregnancy and breastfeeding. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2022;111(1):321‐331. doi:10.1002/cpt.2476
Matchar DB. Introduction to the methods guide for medical test reviews. In: Chang SM, Matchar DB, Smetana GW, et al., eds., Methods guide for medical test reviews [Internet]. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2012. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK98245/
Mahendraratnam N, Silcox C, Mercon K, et al. Determining Real‐World Data's Fitness for Use and the Role of Reliability. Duke‐Margolis Center for Health Policy; 2019 https://healthpolicy.duke.edu/publications/determining-real-world-datas-fitness-use-and-role-reliability
Kahn MG, Callahan TJ, Barnard J, et al. A Harmonized data quality assessment terminology and framework for the secondary use of electronic health record data. EGEMS. 2016;4(1):1244. doi:10.13063/2327‐9214.1244
Qualls LG, Phillips TA, Hammill BG, et al. Evaluating foundational data quality in the National Patient‐Centered Clinical Research Network (PCORnet®). EGEMS. 2018;6(1):3. doi:10.5334/egems.199
Girman CJ, Ritchey ME, Zhou W, Dreyer NA. Considerations in characterizing real‐world data relevance and quality for regulatory purposes: a commentary. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2019;28(4):439‐442. doi:10.1002/pds.4697
Charnock V. Electronic healthcare records and data quality. Health Inf Libr J. 2019;36(1):91‐95. doi:10.1111/hir.12249
Bian J, Lyu T, Loiacono A, et al. Assessing the practice of data quality evaluation in a national clinical data research network through a systematic scoping review in the era of real‐world data. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2020;27(12):1999‐2010. doi:10.1093/jamia/ocaa245
Weiskopf NG, Weng C. Methods and dimensions of electronic health record data quality assessment: enabling reuse for clinical research. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2013;20(1):144‐151. doi:10.1136/amiajnl‐2011‐000681
Reynolds MW, Bourke A, Dreyer NA. Considerations when evaluating real‐world data quality in the context of fitness for purpose. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2020;29(10):1316‐1318. doi:10.1002/pds.5010
Public Policy Committee. International Society of Pharmacoepidemiology. Guidelines for good pharmacoepidemiology practice (GPP). Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2016;25(1):2‐10. doi:10.1002/pds.3891
Lash TL, VanderWeele TJ, Haneuse S, Rothman KJ, eds. Modern Epidemiology. 4th ed. Wolters Kluwer; 2021.
ENCePP Checklist for Study Protocols. European Network of Centres for Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacovigilance. Accessed December 5, 2023 https://www.encepp.eu/standards_and_guidances/checkListProtocols.shtml
Schneeweiss S, Rassen JA, Brown JS, et al. Graphical depiction of longitudinal study designs in health care databases. Ann Intern Med. 2019;170(6):398‐406. doi:10.7326/M18‐3079
Dreyer NA, Bryant A, Velentgas P. The GRACE Checklist: a validated assessment tool for high quality observational studies of comparative effectiveness. J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2016;22(10):1107‐1113. doi:10.18553/jmcp.2016.22.10.1107
Wang SV, Pottegård A, Crown W, et al. HARmonized protocol template to enhance reproducibility of hypothesis evaluating real‐world evidence studies on treatment effects: a good practices report of a joint ISPE/ISPOR task force. Value Health. 2022;25(10):1663‐1672. doi:10.1016/j.jval.2022.09.001
Berger ML, Sox H, Willke RJ, et al. Good practices for real‐world data studies of treatment and/or comparative effectiveness: recommendations from the joint ISPOR‐ISPE special task force on real‐world evidence in health care decision making. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2017;26(9):1033‐1039. doi:10.1002/pds.4297
Orsini LS, Berger M, Crown W, et al. Improving transparency to build Trust in Real‐World Secondary Data Studies for hypothesis testing‐why, what, and how: recommendations and a road map from the real‐world evidence transparency initiative. Value Health. 2020;23(9):1128‐1136. doi:10.1016/j.jval.2020.04.002
Gatto NM, Reynolds RF, Campbell UB. A structured preapproval and postapproval comparative study design framework to generate valid and transparent real‐world evidence for regulatory decisions. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2019;106(1):103‐115. doi:10.1002/cpt.1480
Gatto NM, Campbell UB, Rubinstein E, et al. The structured process to identify fit‐for‐purpose data: a data feasibility assessment framework. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2022;111(1):122‐134. doi:10.1002/cpt.2466
Wang SV, Pinheiro S, Hua W, et al. STaRT‐RWE: structured template for planning and reporting on the implementation of real world evidence studies. BMJ. 2021;372:m4856. doi:10.1136/bmj.m4856
Hernán MA, Robins JM. Using big data to emulate a target trial when a randomized trial is not available. Am J Epidemiol. 2016;183(8):758‐764. doi:10.1093/aje/kwv254
European Medicines Agency. Data Quality Framework for EU medicines regulation. 2023 https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/regulatory‐procedural‐guideline/data‐quality‐framework‐eu‐medicines‐regulation_en.pdf
FDA‐NIH Biomarker Working Group. BEST (Biomarkers, EndpointS, and other Tools) Resource [Internet]. Food and Drug Administration (US); 2016‐. Glossary. 2016 Jan 28 [Updated 2021 Nov 29]. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK338448/ Co‐published by National Institutes of Health (US), Bethesda (MD).
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Draft Guidance for Industry, Electronic Systems, Electronic Records, and Electronic Signatures in Clinical Investigations: Questions and Answers. https://www.fda.gov/regulatory‐information/search‐fda‐guidance‐documents/electronic‐systems‐electronic‐records‐and‐electronic‐signatures‐clinical‐investigations‐questions