Literature DB >> 17323410

Graphical approaches to the analysis of safety data from clinical trials.

Ohad Amit1, Richard M Heiberger, Peter W Lane.   

Abstract

Patient safety has always been a primary focus in the development of new pharmaceutical products. The predominant method for statistical evaluation and interpretation of safety data collected in a clinical trial is the tabular display of descriptive statistics. There is a great opportunity to enhance evaluation of drug safety through the use of graphical displays, which can convey multiple pieces of information concisely and more effectively than can tables. Graphs can be used in an exploratory setting to help identify emerging safety signals, or in a confirmatory setting as a tool to elucidate known safety issues. We developed several graphical displays for routine safety data collected during a clinical trial, covering a broad range of graphical techniques, and illustrate here 10 specific graphical designs, many of which display the data along with statistics derived from them. Two are simple plots, comparing distributions in the form of boxplots or cumulative plots, and four more display data and summaries over time, comparing information from two groups in terms of distribution (with boxplots), cumulative incidence, hazard, or simply means with error bars. The other four are multi-panel displays: one-dimensional and two-dimensional arrays of scatterplots, a trellis of individual profiles, and a paired dotplot displaying risk together with relative risk. The displays focus on key safety endpoints in clinical trials including the QT interval from electrocardiograms, laboratory measurements for detecting hepatotoxicity, and adverse events of special interest. We discuss in detail the statistical and graphical principles underlying the production and interpretation of the displays. (c) 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 17323410     DOI: 10.1002/pst.254

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pharm Stat        ISSN: 1539-1604            Impact factor:   1.894


  9 in total

1.  Visualising harms in publications of randomised controlled trials: consensus and recommendations.

Authors:  Rachel Phillips; Suzie Cro; Graham Wheeler; Simon Bond; Tim P Morris; Siobhan Creanor; Catherine Hewitt; Sharon Love; Andre Lopes; Iryna Schlackow; Carrol Gamble; Graeme MacLennan; Chris Habron; Anthony C Gordon; Nikhil Vergis; Tianjing Li; Riaz Qureshi; Colin C Everett; Jane Holmes; Amanda Kirkham; Clare Peckitt; Sarah Pirrie; Norin Ahmed; Laura Collett; Victoria Cornelius
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2022-05-16

2.  The Safety Explorer Suite: Interactive Safety Monitoring for Clinical Trials.

Authors:  Jeremy Wildfire; Ryan Bailey; Rebecca Z Krouse; Spencer Childress; Britt Sikora; Nathan Bryant; Shane Rosanbalm; Emily Wilson; Jack G Modell
Journal:  Ther Innov Regul Sci       Date:  2018-02-05       Impact factor: 1.778

3.  Longitudinal adverse event assessment in oncology clinical trials: the Toxicity over Time (ToxT) analysis of Alliance trials NCCTG N9741 and 979254.

Authors:  Gita Thanarajasingam; Pamela J Atherton; Paul J Novotny; Charles L Loprinzi; Jeff A Sloan; Axel Grothey
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2016-04-12       Impact factor: 41.316

Review 4.  Analysis and reporting of adverse events in randomised controlled trials: a review.

Authors:  Rachel Phillips; Lorna Hazell; Odile Sauzet; Victoria Cornelius
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2019-03-01       Impact factor: 2.692

5.  Effective Visual Communication for the Quantitative Scientist.

Authors:  Marc Vandemeulebroecke; Mark Baillie; Alison Margolskee; Baldur Magnusson
Journal:  CPT Pharmacometrics Syst Pharmacol       Date:  2019-08-30

Review 6.  Statistical methods for the analysis of adverse event data in randomised controlled trials: a scoping review and taxonomy.

Authors:  Rachel Phillips; Odile Sauzet; Victoria Cornelius
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2020-11-30       Impact factor: 4.615

7.  Advantages of visualisations to evaluate and communicate adverse event information in randomised controlled trials.

Authors:  Victoria Cornelius; Suzie Cro; Rachel Phillips
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2020-12-22       Impact factor: 2.279

8.  Informative graphing of continuous safety variables relative to normal reference limits.

Authors:  Christopher D Breder
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2018-05-16       Impact factor: 4.615

9.  On estimands and the analysis of adverse events in the presence of varying follow-up times within the benefit assessment of therapies.

Authors:  Steffen Unkel; Marjan Amiri; Norbert Benda; Jan Beyersmann; Dietrich Knoerzer; Katrin Kupas; Frank Langer; Friedhelm Leverkus; Anja Loos; Claudia Ose; Tanja Proctor; Claudia Schmoor; Carsten Schwenke; Guido Skipka; Kristina Unnebrink; Florian Voss; Tim Friede
Journal:  Pharm Stat       Date:  2018-11-20       Impact factor: 1.894

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.