EVITA:用于早期评估药物创新治疗优势的工具。

Isabel Püntmann, Norbert Schmacke, Arne Melander, Gunnar Lindberg, Bernd Mühlbauer
{"title":"EVITA:用于早期评估药物创新治疗优势的工具。","authors":"Isabel Püntmann,&nbsp;Norbert Schmacke,&nbsp;Arne Melander,&nbsp;Gunnar Lindberg,&nbsp;Bernd Mühlbauer","doi":"10.1186/1472-6904-10-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>New drugs are generally claimed to represent a therapeutic innovation. However, scientific evidence of a substantial clinical advantage is often lacking. This may be the result of using inadequate control groups or surrogate outcomes only in the clinical trials. In view of this, EVITA was developed as a user-friendly transparent tool for the early evaluation of the additional therapeutic value of a new drug.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>EVITA does not evaluate a new compound per se but in an approved indication in comparison with existing therapeutic strategies. Placebo as a comparator is accepted only in the absence of an established therapy or if employed in an add-on strategy on top. The evaluation attributes rating points to the drug in question, taking into consideration both therapeutic benefit and risk profile. The compound scores positive points for superiority in efficiency and/or adverse effects as demonstrated in randomized controlled trials (RCTs), whilst negative points are awarded for inferiority and/or an unfavorable risk profile. The evaluation follows an algorithm considering the clinical relevance of the outcomes, the strength of the therapeutic effect and the number of RCTs performed. Categories for therapeutic aim and disease severity, although essential parts of the EVITA assessment, are attributed but do not influence the EVITA score which is presented as a color-coded bar graph. In case the available data were unsuitable for an EVITA calculation, a traffic-type yield sign is assigned instead to criticize such practice. The results are presented online http://www.evita-report.de together with all RCTs considered as well as the reasons for excluding a given RCT from the evaluation. This allows for immediate revision in response to justified criticism and simplifies the inclusion of new data.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>As examples, four compounds which received approval within the last years were evaluated for one of their clinical indications: lenalidomide, pioglitazone, bupropion and zoledronic acid. Only the first achieved an EVITA score above zero indicating therapeutic advantage.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The strength of EVITA appears to lie in its speedy assessment of the potential therapeutic advantage of a new drug for a given indication. At the same time, this approach draws attention to the typical deficits of data used for drug approval. EVITA is not intended to replace classical health technology assessment reports but rather serves as a screening tool in the sense of horizon scanning.</p>","PeriodicalId":9196,"journal":{"name":"BMC Clinical Pharmacology","volume":"10 ","pages":"5"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-03-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/1472-6904-10-5","citationCount":"13","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"EVITA: a tool for the early evaluation of pharmaceutical innovations with regard to therapeutic advantage.\",\"authors\":\"Isabel Püntmann,&nbsp;Norbert Schmacke,&nbsp;Arne Melander,&nbsp;Gunnar Lindberg,&nbsp;Bernd Mühlbauer\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/1472-6904-10-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>New drugs are generally claimed to represent a therapeutic innovation. However, scientific evidence of a substantial clinical advantage is often lacking. This may be the result of using inadequate control groups or surrogate outcomes only in the clinical trials. In view of this, EVITA was developed as a user-friendly transparent tool for the early evaluation of the additional therapeutic value of a new drug.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>EVITA does not evaluate a new compound per se but in an approved indication in comparison with existing therapeutic strategies. Placebo as a comparator is accepted only in the absence of an established therapy or if employed in an add-on strategy on top. The evaluation attributes rating points to the drug in question, taking into consideration both therapeutic benefit and risk profile. The compound scores positive points for superiority in efficiency and/or adverse effects as demonstrated in randomized controlled trials (RCTs), whilst negative points are awarded for inferiority and/or an unfavorable risk profile. The evaluation follows an algorithm considering the clinical relevance of the outcomes, the strength of the therapeutic effect and the number of RCTs performed. Categories for therapeutic aim and disease severity, although essential parts of the EVITA assessment, are attributed but do not influence the EVITA score which is presented as a color-coded bar graph. In case the available data were unsuitable for an EVITA calculation, a traffic-type yield sign is assigned instead to criticize such practice. The results are presented online http://www.evita-report.de together with all RCTs considered as well as the reasons for excluding a given RCT from the evaluation. This allows for immediate revision in response to justified criticism and simplifies the inclusion of new data.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>As examples, four compounds which received approval within the last years were evaluated for one of their clinical indications: lenalidomide, pioglitazone, bupropion and zoledronic acid. Only the first achieved an EVITA score above zero indicating therapeutic advantage.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The strength of EVITA appears to lie in its speedy assessment of the potential therapeutic advantage of a new drug for a given indication. At the same time, this approach draws attention to the typical deficits of data used for drug approval. EVITA is not intended to replace classical health technology assessment reports but rather serves as a screening tool in the sense of horizon scanning.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9196,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC Clinical Pharmacology\",\"volume\":\"10 \",\"pages\":\"5\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2010-03-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/1472-6904-10-5\",\"citationCount\":\"13\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC Clinical Pharmacology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6904-10-5\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Clinical Pharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6904-10-5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13

摘要

背景:新药通常被认为是一种治疗创新。然而,科学证据的实质性临床优势往往是缺乏的。这可能是由于在临床试验中使用了不充分的对照组或替代结果。鉴于此,EVITA被开发为一种用户友好的透明工具,用于早期评估新药的附加治疗价值。方法:EVITA本身不评估一种新化合物,而是与现有治疗策略比较批准的适应症。安慰剂作为比较物,只有在没有既定治疗或作为附加策略的情况下才被接受。评估属性评级指向有问题的药物,同时考虑到治疗益处和风险概况。如随机对照试验(rct)所示,该化合物在效率和/或副作用方面的优势得分为正,而在劣效性和/或不利风险方面得分为负。评估遵循一种算法,考虑结果的临床相关性、治疗效果的强度和进行的随机对照试验的数量。治疗目的和疾病严重程度的分类虽然是EVITA评估的重要组成部分,但它们被归类,但不影响EVITA评分,EVITA评分以颜色编码的条形图表示。如果可用的数据不适合EVITA计算,则分配一个交通类型的让步标志来批评这种做法。结果在网上http://www.evita-report.de与所有考虑的随机对照试验以及从评估中排除给定随机试验的原因一起显示。这允许立即修改,以回应合理的批评,并简化了新数据的包含。结果:以来那度胺、吡格列酮、安非他酮和唑来膦酸为例,在过去几年中获得批准的四种化合物的临床适应症之一得到了评估。只有第一种药物的EVITA评分高于零,表明其具有治疗优势。结论:EVITA的优势似乎在于它能快速评估一种新药对特定适应症的潜在治疗优势。与此同时,这种方法引起了对用于药物批准的数据的典型缺陷的注意。EVITA不打算取代传统的卫生技术评估报告,而是作为一种水平扫描意义上的筛查工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

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
EVITA: a tool for the early evaluation of pharmaceutical innovations with regard to therapeutic advantage.

Background: New drugs are generally claimed to represent a therapeutic innovation. However, scientific evidence of a substantial clinical advantage is often lacking. This may be the result of using inadequate control groups or surrogate outcomes only in the clinical trials. In view of this, EVITA was developed as a user-friendly transparent tool for the early evaluation of the additional therapeutic value of a new drug.

Methods: EVITA does not evaluate a new compound per se but in an approved indication in comparison with existing therapeutic strategies. Placebo as a comparator is accepted only in the absence of an established therapy or if employed in an add-on strategy on top. The evaluation attributes rating points to the drug in question, taking into consideration both therapeutic benefit and risk profile. The compound scores positive points for superiority in efficiency and/or adverse effects as demonstrated in randomized controlled trials (RCTs), whilst negative points are awarded for inferiority and/or an unfavorable risk profile. The evaluation follows an algorithm considering the clinical relevance of the outcomes, the strength of the therapeutic effect and the number of RCTs performed. Categories for therapeutic aim and disease severity, although essential parts of the EVITA assessment, are attributed but do not influence the EVITA score which is presented as a color-coded bar graph. In case the available data were unsuitable for an EVITA calculation, a traffic-type yield sign is assigned instead to criticize such practice. The results are presented online http://www.evita-report.de together with all RCTs considered as well as the reasons for excluding a given RCT from the evaluation. This allows for immediate revision in response to justified criticism and simplifies the inclusion of new data.

Results: As examples, four compounds which received approval within the last years were evaluated for one of their clinical indications: lenalidomide, pioglitazone, bupropion and zoledronic acid. Only the first achieved an EVITA score above zero indicating therapeutic advantage.

Conclusions: The strength of EVITA appears to lie in its speedy assessment of the potential therapeutic advantage of a new drug for a given indication. At the same time, this approach draws attention to the typical deficits of data used for drug approval. EVITA is not intended to replace classical health technology assessment reports but rather serves as a screening tool in the sense of horizon scanning.

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
Statin therapy in critical illness: an international survey of intensive care physicians' opinions, attitudes and practice. Correction: Adverse drug reactions to antiretroviral therapy (ARVs): incidence, type and risk factors in Nigeria Data for drugs available through low-cost prescription drug programs are available through pharmacy benefit manager and claims data. Population prevalence of high dose paracetamol in dispensed paracetamol/opioid prescription combinations: an observational study. Adherence to medication for the treatment of psychosis: rates and risk factors in an Ethiopian population.
×
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