Literature DB >> 27712700

Patient Preferences in Regulatory Benefit-Risk Assessments: A US Perspective.

F Reed Johnson1, Mo Zhou2.   

Abstract

Demands for greater transparency in US regulatory assessments of benefits and risks, together with growing interest in engaging patients in Food and Drug Administration regulatory decision making, have resulted in several recent regulatory developments. Although Food and Drug Administration's Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) and Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) have established patient-engagement initiatives, CDRH has proposed guidelines for considering quantitative data on patients' benefit-risk perspectives, while CDER has focused on a more qualitative approach. We summarize two significant studies that were developed in collaboration and consultation with CDER and CDRH. CDER encouraged a patient advocacy group to propose draft guidance on engaging patient and caregiver stakeholders in regulatory decision making for Duchenne muscular dystrophy. CDRH sponsored a discrete-choice experiment case study to quantify obese respondents' perspectives on "meaningful benefits." CDRH and CDER issued draft guidance in May and June 2015, respectively, on including patient-preference data in regulatory submissions. Both organizations face challenges. CDER is working on integrating qualitative data into existing evidence-based review processes and is exploring options for therapeutic areas not included on a priority list. CDRH has adopted an approach that requires patient-preference data to satisfy standards of valid scientific evidence. Although that strategy could facilitate integrating patient perspectives directly with clinical data on benefits and harms, generating such data requires building capacity.
Copyright © 2016 International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  benefit-risk assessment; discrete-choice experiments; patient preferences; regulatory reviews

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27712700     DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2016.04.008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Value Health        ISSN: 1098-3015            Impact factor:   5.725


  31 in total

1.  Exploring Patient Preferences for Adjunct-to-Insulin Therapy in Type 1 Diabetes.

Authors:  Bruce A Perkins; Julio Rosenstock; Jay S Skyler; Lori M Laffel; David Z Cherney; Chantal Mathieu; Christianne Pang; Richard Wood; Ona Kinduryte; Jyothis T George; Jan Marquard; Nima Soleymanlou
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2019-06-08       Impact factor: 19.112

2.  Symposium Title: Preference Evidence for Regulatory Decisions.

Authors:  Juan Marcos Gonzalez; F Reed Johnson; Bennett Levitan; Rebecca Noel; Holly Peay
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2018-10       Impact factor: 3.883

3.  "I Was Trying to Do the Maths": Exploring the Impact of Risk Communication in Discrete Choice Experiments.

Authors:  Caroline Vass; Dan Rigby; Katherine Payne
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2019-02       Impact factor: 3.883

4.  Advancing the Use of Patient Preference Information as Scientific Evidence in Medical Product Evaluation: A Summary Report of the Patient Preference Workshop.

Authors:  Heather L Benz; Ting-Hsuan Joyce Lee; Jui-Hua Tsai; John F P Bridges; Sara Eggers; Megan Moncur; Fadia T Shaya; Ira Shoulson; Erica S Spatz; Leslie Wilson; Anindita Saha
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2019-12       Impact factor: 3.883

5.  Danish Physicians' Views on the Appropriateness of the Involvement of Patients with Type 2 Diabetes in Regulatory Decision Making: A Qualitative Study.

Authors:  Mikkel Lindskov Sachs; Morten Colding-Jørgensen; Per Helboe; Sofia Kälvemark Sporrong; Sven Frøkjaer; Katarina Jelic; Susanne Kaae
Journal:  Pharmaceut Med       Date:  2019-04

6.  Use of Patient Preference Studies in HTA Decision Making: A NICE Perspective.

Authors:  Jacoline C Bouvy; Luke Cowie; Rosemary Lovett; Deborah Morrison; Heidi Livingstone; Nick Crabb
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2020-04       Impact factor: 3.883

7.  Developing an instrument to assess patient preferences for benefits and risks of treating acute myeloid leukemia to promote patient-focused drug development.

Authors:  Jaein Seo; B Douglas Smith; Elihu Estey; Ernest Voyard; Bernadette O' Donoghue; John F P Bridges
Journal:  Curr Med Res Opin       Date:  2018-04-27       Impact factor: 2.580

8.  Analysis of Patient Preferences in Lung Cancer - Estimating Acceptable Tradeoffs Between Treatment Benefit and Side Effects.

Authors:  Ellen M Janssen; Sydney M Dy; Alexa S Meara; Peter J Kneuertz; Carolyn J Presley; John F P Bridges
Journal:  Patient Prefer Adherence       Date:  2020-06-03       Impact factor: 2.711

9.  A Systematic Review of Discrete Choice Experiments in Oncology Treatments.

Authors:  Hannah Collacott; Vikas Soekhai; Caitlin Thomas; Anne Brooks; Ella Brookes; Rachel Lo; Sarah Mulnick; Sebastian Heidenreich
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2021-05-05       Impact factor: 3.883

10.  The Patient Perspective: Putting the Patient at the Center of the Translational Innovation Process.

Authors:  Leslie Wilson; Lawrence Lin; Kuldev Singh
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2019-11-23       Impact factor: 6.903

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.