Literature DB >> 32087341

Considerations for development of an evidence dossier to support the use of mobile sensor technology for clinical outcome assessments in clinical trials.

M K Walton1, J C Cappelleri2, B Byrom3, J C Goldsack4, S Eremenco5, D Harris6, E Potero7, N Patel8, E Flood8, M Daumer9.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Mobile sensors offer enormous potential for the collection of informative clinical endpoints in clinical trials to support regulatory decision making and product labelling. There are currently no specific guidelines on the information needed to enable regulators to review and accept proposed endpoints derived from mobile sensors for use in drug development trials.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this working group report is to recommend the structure and content of an evidence dossier intended to support whether a clinical endpoint derived from mobile sensor data is fit-for-purpose for use in regulatory submissions for drug approvals. EVIDENCE DOSSIER: The structure and content of a dossier to provide evidence supporting the use of a sensor-derived clinical endpoint is described. Sections include clinical endpoint definition and positioning, the concept of interest, the context of use, clinical validation and interpretation, study implementation, and analytical validity with sensor performance verification in support of the selected sensor.
CONCLUSIONS: In the absence of definitive regulatory guidance, this report provides a considered approach to compiling a comprehensive body of evidence to justify acceptance of mobile sensors for support of new drug applications.
Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Analytical validation; Clinical endpoints; Clinical outcome assessments; Clinical validation; Evidence dossier; Medical product labelling; Mobile sensors; New drug applications; Novel endpoints; Wearables

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32087341     DOI: 10.1016/j.cct.2020.105962

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials        ISSN: 1551-7144            Impact factor:   2.226


  10 in total

Review 1.  A Roadmap to Inform Development, Validation and Approval of Digital Mobility Outcomes: The Mobilise-D Approach.

Authors:  Lynn Rochester; Claudia Mazzà; Arne Mueller; Brian Caulfield; Marie McCarthy; Clemens Becker; Ram Miller; Paolo Piraino; Marco Viceconti; Wilhelmus P Dartee; Judith Garcia-Aymerich; Aida A Aydemir; Beatrix Vereijken; Valdo Arnera; Nadir Ammour; Michael Jackson; Tilo Hache; Ronenn Roubenoff
Journal:  Digit Biomark       Date:  2020-11-26

2.  The Path Forward for Digital Measures: Suppressing the Desire to Compare Apples and Pineapples.

Authors:  Carrie R Houts; Bray Patrick-Lake; Ieuan Clay; R J Wirth
Journal:  Digit Biomark       Date:  2020-11-26

Review 3.  Coupled Multiphysics Modelling of Sensors for Chemical, Biomedical, and Environmental Applications with Focus on Smart Materials and Low-Dimensional Nanostructures.

Authors:  Sundeep Singh; Roderick Melnik
Journal:  Chemosensors (Basel)       Date:  2022-04-25

4.  Impact of Using A Mixed Data Collection Modality on Statistical Inferences in Decentralized Clinical Trials.

Authors:  Alexandra Curtis; Yongming Qu
Journal:  Ther Innov Regul Sci       Date:  2022-05-24       Impact factor: 1.337

Review 5.  Precompetitive Consensus Building to Facilitate the Use of Digital Health Technologies to Support Parkinson Disease Drug Development through Regulatory Science.

Authors:  Diane Stephenson; Robert Alexander; Varun Aggarwal; Reham Badawy; Lisa Bain; Roopal Bhatnagar; Bastiaan R Bloem; Babak Boroojerdi; Jackson Burton; Jesse M Cedarbaum; Josh Cosman; David T Dexter; Marissa Dockendorf; E Ray Dorsey; Ariel V Dowling; Luc J W Evers; Katherine Fisher; Mark Frasier; Luis Garcia-Gancedo; Jennifer C Goldsack; Derek Hill; Janice Hitchcock; Michele T Hu; Michael P Lawton; Susan J Lee; Michael Lindemann; Ken Marek; Nitin Mehrotra; Marjan J Meinders; Michael Minchik; Lauren Oliva; Klaus Romero; George Roussos; Robert Rubens; Sakshi Sadar; Joseph Scheeren; Eiichi Sengoku; Tanya Simuni; Glenn Stebbins; Kirsten I Taylor; Beatrice Yang; Neta Zach
Journal:  Digit Biomark       Date:  2020-11-26

6.  Outcome measures based on digital health technology sensor data: data- and patient-centric approaches.

Authors:  Kirsten I Taylor; Hannah Staunton; Florian Lipsmeier; David Nobbs; Michael Lindemann
Journal:  NPJ Digit Med       Date:  2020-07-23

Review 7.  Recommendations for Defining and Reporting Adherence Measured by Biometric Monitoring Technologies: Systematic Review.

Authors:  Iredia M Olaye; Mia P Belovsky; Lauren Bataille; Royce Cheng; Ali Ciger; Karen L Fortuna; Elena S Izmailova; Debbe McCall; Christopher J Miller; Willie Muehlhausen; Carrie A Northcott; Isaac R Rodriguez-Chavez; Abhishek Pratap; Benjamin Vandendriessche; Yaara Zisman-Ilani; Jessie P Bakker
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2022-04-14       Impact factor: 5.428

8.  Reliability and acceptance of dreaMS, a software application for people with multiple sclerosis: a feasibility study.

Authors:  Johannes Lorscheider; Yvonne Naegelin; Tim Woelfle; Silvan Pless; Oscar Reyes; Andrea Wiencierz; Anthony Feinstein; Pasquale Calabrese; Konstantin Gugleta; Ludwig Kappos
Journal:  J Neurol       Date:  2022-08-30       Impact factor: 6.682

9.  The Patient Matters in the End(point).

Authors:  Pip Griffiths; Diana Rofail; Rea Lehner; Vera Mastey
Journal:  Adv Ther       Date:  2022-08-05       Impact factor: 4.070

Review 10.  Fit-for-Purpose Biometric Monitoring Technologies: Leveraging the Laboratory Biomarker Experience.

Authors:  Alan Godfrey; Benjamin Vandendriessche; Jessie P Bakker; Cheryl Fitzer-Attas; Ninad Gujar; Matthew Hobbs; Qi Liu; Carrie A Northcott; Virginia Parks; William A Wood; Vadim Zipunnikov; John A Wagner; Elena S Izmailova
Journal:  Clin Transl Sci       Date:  2020-08-25       Impact factor: 4.689

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.