Literature DB >> 27712701

A Framework for Incorporating Patient Preferences Regarding Benefits and Risks into Regulatory Assessment of Medical Technologies.

Martin Ho1, Anindita Saha1, K Kimberly McCleary2, Bennett Levitan3, Stephanie Christopher4, Kristen Zandlo5, R Scott Braithwaite6, A Brett Hauber7.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In response to 2012 guidance in which the US Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) stated the importance of patient-centric measures in regulatory benefit-risk assessments, the Medical Device Innovation Consortium (MDIC) initiated a project. The project was used to develop a framework to help the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and industry sponsors understand how patient preferences regarding benefit and risk might be integrated into the review of innovative medical devices.
METHODS: A public-private partnership of experts from medical device industry, government, academia and non-profits collaborated on development of the MDIC patient centered benefit-risk framework.
RESULTS: The MDIC Framework examines what patient preference information is and the potential use and value of patient preference information in the regulatory process and across the product development life cycle. The MDIC Framework also includes a catalog of patient preference assessment methods and an agenda for future research to advance the field.
CONCLUSIONS: This article discusses key concepts in patient preference assessment of particular importance for regulators and researchers that are addressed in the MDIC Framework for patient centered benefit-risk assessment as well as the unique public-private collaboration that led its development.
Copyright © 2016 International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  patient-derived preferences; preference-based measures; preferences; regulatory

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27712701     DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2016.02.019

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


  48 in total

1.  Increased survival time or better quality of life? Trade-off between benefits and adverse events in the systemic treatment of cancer.

Authors:  V Valentí; J Ramos; C Pérez; L Capdevila; I Ruiz; L Tikhomirova; M Sánchez; I Juez; M Llobera; E Sopena; J Rubió; R Salazar
Journal:  Clin Transl Oncol       Date:  2019-09-26       Impact factor: 3.405

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.  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

4.  Development of a Patient Preference Survey for Wearable Kidney Replacement Therapy Devices.

Authors:  Jennifer E Flythe; Derek Forfang; Nieltje Gedney; David M White; Caroline Wilkie; Kerri L Cavanaugh; Raymond C Harris; Mark Unruh; Grace Squillaci; Melissa West; Carol Mansfield; Cindy S Soloe; Katherine Treiman; Dallas Wood; Frank P Hurst; Carolyn Y Neuland; Anindita Saha; Murray Sheldon; Michelle E Tarver
Journal:  Kidney360       Date:  2022-05-05

Review 5.  Methods to Summarize Discrete-Choice Experiments in a Systematic Review: A Scoping Review.

Authors:  Daksh Choudhary; Megan Thomas; Kevin Pacheco-Barrios; Yuan Zhang; Pablo Alonso-Coello; Holger Schünemann; Glen Hazlewood
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2022-07-13       Impact factor: 3.481

Review 6.  Benefit-risk assessment and reporting in clinical trials of chronic pain treatments: IMMPACT recommendations.

Authors:  Bethea A Kleykamp; Robert H Dworkin; Dennis C Turk; Zubin Bhagwagar; Penney Cowan; Christopher Eccleston; Susan S Ellenberg; Scott R Evans; John T Farrar; Roy L Freeman; Louis P Garrison; Jennifer S Gewandter; Veeraindar Goli; Smriti Iyengar; Alejandro R Jadad; Mark P Jensen; Roderick Junor; Nathaniel P Katz; J Patrick Kesslak; Ernest A Kopecky; Dmitri Lissin; John D Markman; Michael P McDermott; Philip J Mease; Alec B O'Connor; Kushang V Patel; Srinivasa N Raja; Michael C Rowbotham; Cristina Sampaio; Jasvinder A Singh; Ilona Steigerwald; Vibeke Strand; Leslie A Tive; Jeffrey Tobias; Ajay D Wasan; Hilary D Wilson
Journal:  Pain       Date:  2021-09-09       Impact factor: 7.926

Review 7.  Patient Preference Studies for Advanced Prostate Cancer Treatment Along the Medical Product Life Cycle: Systematic Literature Review.

Authors:  Dominik Menges; Michela C Piatti; Thomas Cerny; Milo A Puhan
Journal:  Patient Prefer Adherence       Date:  2022-06-28       Impact factor: 2.314

Review 8.  Evaluating Risk Tolerance from a Systematic Review of Preferences: The Case of Patients with Psoriasis.

Authors:  Juan Marcos Gonzalez
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2018-06       Impact factor: 3.883

9.  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

10.  Innovative Medical Technology and the Treatment Decision-Making Process in Multiple Sclerosis: A Focus Group Study to Examine Patient Perspectives.

Authors:  L A Visser; M De Mul; W K Redekop
Journal:  Patient Prefer Adherence       Date:  2021-05-07       Impact factor: 2.711

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.