What ever happened to N-of-1 trials? Insiders' perspectives and a look to the future.

Richard L Kravitz, N. Duan, Edmund J. Niedzinski, M. Hay, SASKIA K. Subramanian, THOMAS S. Weisner
{"title":"What ever happened to N-of-1 trials? Insiders' perspectives and a look to the future.","authors":"Richard L Kravitz, N. Duan, Edmund J. Niedzinski, M. Hay, SASKIA K. Subramanian, THOMAS S. Weisner","doi":"10.1111/j.1468-0009.2008.00533.x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"CONTEXT\nWhen feasible, randomized, blinded single-patient (n-of-1) trials are uniquely capable of establishing the best treatment in an individual patient. Despite early enthusiasm, by the turn of the twenty-first century, few academic centers were conducting n-of-1 trials on a regular basis.\n\n\nMETHODS\nThe authors reviewed the literature and conducted in-depth telephone interviews with leaders in the n-of-1 trial movement.\n\n\nFINDINGS\nN-of-1 trials can improve care by increasing therapeutic precision. However, they have not been widely adopted, in part because physicians do not sufficiently value the reduction in uncertainty they yield weighed against the inconvenience they impose. Limited evidence suggests that patients may be receptive to n-of-1 trials once they understand the benefits.\n\n\nCONCLUSIONS\nN-of-1 trials offer a unique opportunity to individualize clinical care and enrich clinical research. While ongoing changes in drug discovery, manufacture, and marketing may ultimately spur pharmaceutical makers and health care payers to support n-of-1 trials, at present the most promising resuscitation strategy is stripping n-of-1 trials to their essentials and marketing them directly to patients. In order to optimize statistical inference from these trials, empirical Bayes methods can be used to combine individual patient data with aggregate data from comparable patients.","PeriodicalId":78777,"journal":{"name":"The Milbank Memorial Fund quarterly","volume":"25 1","pages":"533-55"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"82","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Milbank Memorial Fund quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0009.2008.00533.x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 82

Abstract

CONTEXT When feasible, randomized, blinded single-patient (n-of-1) trials are uniquely capable of establishing the best treatment in an individual patient. Despite early enthusiasm, by the turn of the twenty-first century, few academic centers were conducting n-of-1 trials on a regular basis. METHODS The authors reviewed the literature and conducted in-depth telephone interviews with leaders in the n-of-1 trial movement. FINDINGS N-of-1 trials can improve care by increasing therapeutic precision. However, they have not been widely adopted, in part because physicians do not sufficiently value the reduction in uncertainty they yield weighed against the inconvenience they impose. Limited evidence suggests that patients may be receptive to n-of-1 trials once they understand the benefits. CONCLUSIONS N-of-1 trials offer a unique opportunity to individualize clinical care and enrich clinical research. While ongoing changes in drug discovery, manufacture, and marketing may ultimately spur pharmaceutical makers and health care payers to support n-of-1 trials, at present the most promising resuscitation strategy is stripping n-of-1 trials to their essentials and marketing them directly to patients. In order to optimize statistical inference from these trials, empirical Bayes methods can be used to combine individual patient data with aggregate data from comparable patients.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
n(1)次试验发生了什么?业内人士的观点和对未来的展望。
在可行的情况下,随机、盲法单患者(n-of-1)试验是唯一能够确定单个患者最佳治疗方案的方法。尽管早期的热情高涨,但到了21世纪之交,很少有学术中心定期进行n-of-1试验。方法:作者回顾了文献,并对n-of-1试验运动的领导人进行了深入的电话采访。发现sn -of-1试验可以通过提高治疗精度来改善护理。然而,它们并没有被广泛采用,部分原因是医生没有充分重视它们带来的不确定性的减少,而不是它们带来的不便。有限的证据表明,一旦患者了解了益处,他们可能会接受n-of-1试验。结论sn -of-1临床试验为个性化临床护理和丰富临床研究提供了独特的机会。虽然药物发现、生产和营销方面的持续变化可能最终会促使制药商和医疗保健支付者支持n-of-1试验,但目前最有希望的复苏策略是将n-of-1试验剥离出来,保留其基本要素,并直接向患者推销。为了优化这些试验的统计推断,可以使用经验贝叶斯方法将个体患者数据与来自可比患者的汇总数据结合起来。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Measurement of Nasal Mucociliary Clearance in Indian Adults: Normative Data. Acknowledgments. Acknowledgments In the December 2019 Issue of the Quarterly In the September 2019 Issue of the Quarterly.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1