Literature DB >> 20681742

Evaluation of benefit-risk.

Silvio Garattini1.   

Abstract

Drug authorization, prescription and utilization are all based on benefit-risk assessment. This is made difficult by the apparent lack of objective means to measure the balance and by limitations regarding each of the two items. Benefit is sometimes measured by surrogate indicators of a real clinical advantage. It is assumed to be applicable to individuals even though it is measured in populations, and is represented in different ways that may convey different messages to physicians and patients. Risks are also hard to predict on an individual level. They may also be overlooked or revealed later than benefit, thus biasing the balance for a long time. Their causal relationship with the treatment is often not fully established. The benefit-risk balance itself has no generally recognized measure. This is why benefits and risks are hard to compare; either one or both may occur in single patients, and a risk-benefit profile that is acceptable in severe diseases may not be acceptable in diseases with a favourable prognosis. Pharmacoeconomics offers promising methods of health outcomes modelling using QALYs that take into consideration quality of life as well as survival. Primarily conceived as a guide for establishing the value of a treatment, they may prove useful as a means of trading efficacy and safety. However, quality of life is not always - or adequately - assessed in clinical studies. It is also not clear which is the most appropriate model to calculate QALYs for clinical purposes and how it can be used as a predictive tool at the individual level.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20681742     DOI: 10.2165/11537590-000000000-00000

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics        ISSN: 1170-7690            Impact factor:   4.981


  30 in total

Review 1.  Pharmacoeconomics and pharmacoepidemiology: curious bedfellows or a match made in heaven?

Authors:  Andrew H Briggs; Adrian R Levy
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 2.  Do we learn the right things from clinical trials?

Authors:  Silvio Garattini; Vittorio Bertele'
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2008-01-29       Impact factor: 2.953

3.  Adjusting the number needed to treat: incorporating adjustments for the utility and timing of benefits and harms.

Authors:  R Riegelman; W S Schroth
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  1993 Jul-Sep       Impact factor: 2.583

4.  The number needed to treat: a clinically useful measure of treatment effect.

Authors:  R J Cook; D L Sackett
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1995-02-18

Review 5.  Surrogate end points in clinical research: hazardous to your health.

Authors:  David A Grimes; Kenneth F Schulz
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 7.661

6.  Patients' responses to risk information about the benefits of treating hypertension.

Authors:  D Misselbrook; D Armstrong
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 5.386

7.  Events per person year--a dubious concept.

Authors:  J Windeler; S Lange
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1995-02-18

8.  Challenges to use of health-related quality of life for Food and Drug Administration approval of anticancer products.

Authors:  Edwin P Rock; Jane A Scott; Dianne L Kennedy; Rajeshwari Sridhara; Richard Pazdur; Laurie B Burke
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr       Date:  2007

9.  Health risks and benefits 3 years after stopping randomized treatment with estrogen and progestin.

Authors:  Gerardo Heiss; Robert Wallace; Garnet L Anderson; Aaron Aragaki; Shirley A A Beresford; Robert Brzyski; Rowan T Chlebowski; Margery Gass; Andrea LaCroix; JoAnn E Manson; Ross L Prentice; Jacques Rossouw; Marcia L Stefanick
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2008-03-05       Impact factor: 56.272

10.  Number needed to treat: easily understood and intuitively meaningful? Theoretical considerations and a randomized trial.

Authors:  Ivar Sønbø Kristiansen; Dorte Gyrd-Hansen; Jørgen Nexøe; Jesper Bo Nielsen
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 6.437

View more
  2 in total

1.  A cohort study exploring determinants of safety-related regulatory actions for biopharmaceuticals.

Authors:  Hans C Ebbers; Aukje K Mantel-Teeuwisse; Ellen H M Moors; Fakhredin A Sayed Tabatabaei; Huub Schellekens; Hubert G M Leufkens
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2012-05-01       Impact factor: 5.606

Review 2.  The value of anticancer drugs - a regulatory view.

Authors:  Francesco Pignatti; Ulla Wilking; Douwe Postmus; Nils Wilking; Julio Delgado; Jonas Bergh
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2021-12-06       Impact factor: 66.675

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.