非肿瘤性慢性病治疗的替代标记物与临床结果之间的关系

JAMA Pub Date : 2024-04-22 DOI:10.1001/jama.2024.4175
Joshua D. Wallach, Samuel Yoon, Harry Doernberg, Laura R. Glick, Oriana Ciani, Rod S. Taylor, Maryam Mooghali, Reshma Ramachandran, Joseph S. Ross
{"title":"非肿瘤性慢性病治疗的替代标记物与临床结果之间的关系","authors":"Joshua D. Wallach, Samuel Yoon, Harry Doernberg, Laura R. Glick, Oriana Ciani, Rod S. Taylor, Maryam Mooghali, Reshma Ramachandran, Joseph S. Ross","doi":"10.1001/jama.2024.4175","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ImportanceSurrogate markers are increasingly used as primary end points in clinical trials supporting drug approvals.ObjectiveTo systematically summarize the evidence from meta-analyses, systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and pooled analyses (hereafter, meta-analyses) of clinical trials examining the strength of association between treatment effects measured using surrogate markers and clinical outcomes in nononcologic chronic diseases.Data sourcesThe Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Adult Surrogate Endpoint Table and MEDLINE from inception to March 19, 2023.Study SelectionThree reviewers selected meta-analyses of clinical trials; meta-analyses of observational studies were excluded.Data Extraction and SynthesisTwo reviewers extracted correlation coefficients, coefficients of determination, slopes, effect estimates, or results from meta-regression analyses between surrogate markers and clinical outcomes.Main Outcomes and MeasuresCorrelation coefficient or coefficient of determination, when reported, was classified as high strength (<jats:italic>r</jats:italic> ≥ 0.85 or <jats:italic>R</jats:italic><jats:sup>2</jats:sup> ≥ 0.72); primary findings were otherwise summarized.ResultsThirty-seven surrogate markers listed in FDA’s table and used as primary end points in clinical trials across 32 unique nononcologic chronic diseases were included. For 22 (59%) surrogate markers (21 chronic diseases), no eligible meta-analysis was identified. For 15 (41%) surrogate markers (14 chronic diseases), at least 1 meta-analysis was identified, 54 in total (median per surrogate marker, 2.5; IQR, 1.3-6.0); among these, median number of trials and patients meta-analyzed was 18.5 (IQR, 12.0-43.0) and 90 056 (IQR, 20 109-170 014), respectively. The 54 meta-analyses reported 109 unique surrogate marker–clinical outcome pairs: 59 (54%) reported at least 1 <jats:italic>r</jats:italic> or <jats:italic>R</jats:italic><jats:sup>2</jats:sup>, 10 (17%) of which reported at least 1 classified as high strength, whereas 50 (46%) reported slopes, effect estimates, or results of meta-regression analyses only, 26 (52%) of which reported at least 1 statistically significant result.Conclusions and RelevanceMost surrogate markers used as primary end points in clinical trials to support FDA approval of drugs treating nononcologic chronic diseases lacked high-strength evidence of associations with clinical outcomes from published meta-analyses.","PeriodicalId":518009,"journal":{"name":"JAMA","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Associations Between Surrogate Markers and Clinical Outcomes for Nononcologic Chronic Disease Treatments\",\"authors\":\"Joshua D. Wallach, Samuel Yoon, Harry Doernberg, Laura R. Glick, Oriana Ciani, Rod S. Taylor, Maryam Mooghali, Reshma Ramachandran, Joseph S. Ross\",\"doi\":\"10.1001/jama.2024.4175\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ImportanceSurrogate markers are increasingly used as primary end points in clinical trials supporting drug approvals.ObjectiveTo systematically summarize the evidence from meta-analyses, systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and pooled analyses (hereafter, meta-analyses) of clinical trials examining the strength of association between treatment effects measured using surrogate markers and clinical outcomes in nononcologic chronic diseases.Data sourcesThe Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Adult Surrogate Endpoint Table and MEDLINE from inception to March 19, 2023.Study SelectionThree reviewers selected meta-analyses of clinical trials; meta-analyses of observational studies were excluded.Data Extraction and SynthesisTwo reviewers extracted correlation coefficients, coefficients of determination, slopes, effect estimates, or results from meta-regression analyses between surrogate markers and clinical outcomes.Main Outcomes and MeasuresCorrelation coefficient or coefficient of determination, when reported, was classified as high strength (<jats:italic>r</jats:italic> ≥ 0.85 or <jats:italic>R</jats:italic><jats:sup>2</jats:sup> ≥ 0.72); primary findings were otherwise summarized.ResultsThirty-seven surrogate markers listed in FDA’s table and used as primary end points in clinical trials across 32 unique nononcologic chronic diseases were included. For 22 (59%) surrogate markers (21 chronic diseases), no eligible meta-analysis was identified. For 15 (41%) surrogate markers (14 chronic diseases), at least 1 meta-analysis was identified, 54 in total (median per surrogate marker, 2.5; IQR, 1.3-6.0); among these, median number of trials and patients meta-analyzed was 18.5 (IQR, 12.0-43.0) and 90 056 (IQR, 20 109-170 014), respectively. The 54 meta-analyses reported 109 unique surrogate marker–clinical outcome pairs: 59 (54%) reported at least 1 <jats:italic>r</jats:italic> or <jats:italic>R</jats:italic><jats:sup>2</jats:sup>, 10 (17%) of which reported at least 1 classified as high strength, whereas 50 (46%) reported slopes, effect estimates, or results of meta-regression analyses only, 26 (52%) of which reported at least 1 statistically significant result.Conclusions and RelevanceMost surrogate markers used as primary end points in clinical trials to support FDA approval of drugs treating nononcologic chronic diseases lacked high-strength evidence of associations with clinical outcomes from published meta-analyses.\",\"PeriodicalId\":518009,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JAMA\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JAMA\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2024.4175\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JAMA","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2024.4175","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

重要性在支持药物审批的临床试验中,替代标志物越来越多地被用作主要终点。目的系统地总结来自荟萃分析、系统综述和荟萃分析以及临床试验汇总分析(以下简称荟萃分析)的证据,这些分析考察了使用替代标志物测量的治疗效果与非肿瘤性慢性疾病临床结局之间的关联强度。数据来源美国食品和药物管理局(FDA)成人替代终点表以及从开始到2023年3月19日的MEDLINE。数据提取与综合两位审稿人提取了代用标记物与临床结果之间的相关系数、决定系数、斜率、效应估计值或元回归分析结果。结果纳入了 FDA 表格中列出的 37 种代用标记物,这些标记物在 32 种独特的非肿瘤性慢性疾病的临床试验中被用作主要终点。对于 22 种(59%)代用指标(21 种慢性疾病),未发现符合条件的荟萃分析。对于 15 种(41%)代用指标(14 种慢性疾病),至少发现了一项荟萃分析,共计 54 项(每种代用指标的中位数为 2.5;IQR 为 1.3-6.0);其中,荟萃分析的试验和患者的中位数分别为 18.5(IQR 为 12.0-43.0)和 90 056(IQR 为 20 109-170014)。54 项元分析报告了 109 对独特的替代标记物-临床结果对:59 项(54%)报告了至少 1 个 r 或 R2,其中 10 项(17%)报告了至少 1 个高强度标记物,而 50 项(46%)仅报告了斜率、效应估计值或元回归分析结果,其中 26 项(52%)报告了至少 1 个具有统计学意义的结果。结论与相关性在临床试验中作为主要终点支持美国食品药品管理局批准治疗非肿瘤性慢性疾病药物的大多数替代标记物缺乏已发表的荟萃分析中与临床结果相关的高强度证据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Associations Between Surrogate Markers and Clinical Outcomes for Nononcologic Chronic Disease Treatments
ImportanceSurrogate markers are increasingly used as primary end points in clinical trials supporting drug approvals.ObjectiveTo systematically summarize the evidence from meta-analyses, systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and pooled analyses (hereafter, meta-analyses) of clinical trials examining the strength of association between treatment effects measured using surrogate markers and clinical outcomes in nononcologic chronic diseases.Data sourcesThe Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Adult Surrogate Endpoint Table and MEDLINE from inception to March 19, 2023.Study SelectionThree reviewers selected meta-analyses of clinical trials; meta-analyses of observational studies were excluded.Data Extraction and SynthesisTwo reviewers extracted correlation coefficients, coefficients of determination, slopes, effect estimates, or results from meta-regression analyses between surrogate markers and clinical outcomes.Main Outcomes and MeasuresCorrelation coefficient or coefficient of determination, when reported, was classified as high strength (r ≥ 0.85 or R2 ≥ 0.72); primary findings were otherwise summarized.ResultsThirty-seven surrogate markers listed in FDA’s table and used as primary end points in clinical trials across 32 unique nononcologic chronic diseases were included. For 22 (59%) surrogate markers (21 chronic diseases), no eligible meta-analysis was identified. For 15 (41%) surrogate markers (14 chronic diseases), at least 1 meta-analysis was identified, 54 in total (median per surrogate marker, 2.5; IQR, 1.3-6.0); among these, median number of trials and patients meta-analyzed was 18.5 (IQR, 12.0-43.0) and 90 056 (IQR, 20 109-170 014), respectively. The 54 meta-analyses reported 109 unique surrogate marker–clinical outcome pairs: 59 (54%) reported at least 1 r or R2, 10 (17%) of which reported at least 1 classified as high strength, whereas 50 (46%) reported slopes, effect estimates, or results of meta-regression analyses only, 26 (52%) of which reported at least 1 statistically significant result.Conclusions and RelevanceMost surrogate markers used as primary end points in clinical trials to support FDA approval of drugs treating nononcologic chronic diseases lacked high-strength evidence of associations with clinical outcomes from published meta-analyses.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Chemistry Matters—From a Putative Peptide to Effective Treatments for Diabetes and Obesity Thirty-Five Years of HIV Research in Africa—An Interview With Winners of the 2024 Lasker-Bloomberg Public Service Award GLP-1 for Treating Obesity—Origin, History, and Evolution AIDS in Africa—Impact of Research Word Choice and the Patient Encounter.
×
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