BACKGROUND: In contrast to the restrictive nature of randomised controlled trials (RCT), non-interventional studies (NIS) investigate the features of a therapy in daily clinical practice. The observational plan of NIS does not dictate a treatment strategy, but is based on the product label. Unlike RCT, NIS therefore have no actual inclusion and exclusion criteria, allowing the study of broad heterogeneous patient populations. METHODS: NIS carried out in Germany with support from the pharmaceutical industry and investigating the use of biologics for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis were identified and their findings were compared with those from the RCT of the respective biologic. RESULTS: Analysis of the identified NIS revealed the following: (1) populations in NIS were on average more than twice as large as in RCT, (2) patient characteristics in NIS and RCT were different, (3) the effectiveness of biologics in NIS was comparable to the efficacy observed in RCT, and (4) NIS collected supplementary data, e.g. on usage and dosing in clinical practice. CONCLUSION: NIS represent an important tool for the assessment of daily clinical practice. Despite methodological drawbacks, NIS provide valuable data that contribute to a more complete picture of the value of treatment with biologics. The English version of this article is available at SpringerLink (under "Supplemental").
BACKGROUND: In contrast to the restrictive nature of randomised controlled trials (RCT), non-interventional studies (NIS) investigate the features of a therapy in daily clinical practice. The observational plan of NIS does not dictate a treatment strategy, but is based on the product label. Unlike RCT, NIS therefore have no actual inclusion and exclusion criteria, allowing the study of broad heterogeneous patient populations. METHODS:NIS carried out in Germany with support from the pharmaceutical industry and investigating the use of biologics for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis were identified and their findings were compared with those from the RCT of the respective biologic. RESULTS: Analysis of the identified NIS revealed the following: (1) populations in NIS were on average more than twice as large as in RCT, (2) patient characteristics in NIS and RCT were different, (3) the effectiveness of biologics in NIS was comparable to the efficacy observed in RCT, and (4) NIS collected supplementary data, e.g. on usage and dosing in clinical practice. CONCLUSION:NIS represent an important tool for the assessment of daily clinical practice. Despite methodological drawbacks, NIS provide valuable data that contribute to a more complete picture of the value of treatment with biologics. The English version of this article is available at SpringerLink (under "Supplemental").
Authors: R Maini; E W St Clair; F Breedveld; D Furst; J Kalden; M Weisman; J Smolen; P Emery; G Harriman; M Feldmann; P Lipsky Journal: Lancet Date: 1999-12-04 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Klaus Krüger; Jürgen Wollenhaupt; Hanns-Martin Lorenz; Ekkehard Röther; Bianca M Wittig Journal: Rheumatol Int Date: 2011-12-30 Impact factor: 2.631
Authors: Joel M Kremer; Maxime Dougados; Paul Emery; Patrick Durez; Jean Sibilia; William Shergy; Serge Steinfeld; Elizabeth Tindall; Jean-Claude Becker; Tracy Li; Isaac F Nuamah; Richard Aranda; Larry W Moreland Journal: Arthritis Rheum Date: 2005-08
Authors: L W Moreland; M H Schiff; S W Baumgartner; E A Tindall; R M Fleischmann; K J Bulpitt; A L Weaver; E C Keystone; D E Furst; P J Mease; E M Ruderman; D A Horwitz; D G Arkfeld; L Garrison; D J Burge; C M Blosch; M L Lange; N D McDonnell; M E Weinblatt Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 1999-03-16 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Ferdinand C Breedveld; Michael H Weisman; Arthur F Kavanaugh; Stanley B Cohen; Karel Pavelka; Ronald van Vollenhoven; John Sharp; John L Perez; George T Spencer-Green Journal: Arthritis Rheum Date: 2006-01
Authors: Josef S Smolen; Andre Beaulieu; Andrea Rubbert-Roth; Cesar Ramos-Remus; Josef Rovensky; Emma Alecock; Thasia Woodworth; Rieke Alten Journal: Lancet Date: 2008-03-22 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Paul Emery; Roy M Fleischmann; Larry W Moreland; Elizabeth C Hsia; Ingrid Strusberg; Patrick Durez; Peter Nash; Eric Jason B Amante; Melvin Churchill; Won Park; Bernardo Antonio Pons-Estel; Mittie K Doyle; Sudha Visvanathan; Weichun Xu; Mahboob U Rahman Journal: Arthritis Rheum Date: 2009-08
Authors: Edward Keystone; Désireé van der Heijde; David Mason; Robert Landewé; Ronald Van Vollenhoven; Bernard Combe; Paul Emery; Vibeke Strand; Philip Mease; Chintu Desai; Karel Pavelka Journal: Arthritis Rheum Date: 2008-11
Authors: M Schiff; M Keiserman; C Codding; S Songcharoen; A Berman; S Nayiager; C Saldate; T Li; R Aranda; J-C Becker; C Lin; P L N Cornet; M Dougados Journal: Ann Rheum Dis Date: 2007-11-29 Impact factor: 19.103
Authors: Klaus Krüger; Gerd R Burmester; Siegfried Wassenberg; Martin Bohl-Bühler; Matthias H Thomas Journal: Rheumatol Int Date: 2018-11-10 Impact factor: 2.631