Quality of Methods for Assessing and Reporting Serious Adverse Events in Clinical Trials of Cancer Drugs

被引:13
作者
Belknap, S. M. [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Georgopoulos, C. H. [1 ]
West, D. P. [2 ,3 ]
Yarnold, P. R. [3 ,4 ]
Kelly, W. N.
机构
[1] Northwestern Univ, Dept Med, Feinberg Sch Med, Chicago, IL 60611 USA
[2] Northwestern Univ, Feinberg Sch Med, Dept Dermatol, Chicago, IL 60611 USA
[3] Northwestern Univ, Robert H Lurie Comprehens Canc Ctr, Feinberg Sch Med, Chicago, IL 60611 USA
[4] Northwestern Univ, Dept Emergency Med, Feinberg Sch Med, Chicago, IL 60611 USA
关键词
CAUSAL ASSOCIATION; CRITERIA; PHARMACOVIGILANCE; PROJECT; SAFETY;
D O I
10.1038/clpt.2010.79
中图分类号
R9 [药学];
学科分类号
100702 [药剂学];
摘要
The validity of information regarding drug toxicity in humans depends on the quality of the methods and instruments used to assess adverse drug events (ADEs). This study evaluates the quality of instruments used to assess and report ADEs to institutional review boards (IRBs) at US cancer centers. Forms from all 49 National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated centers were assessed for utility in abstracting event type, severity, and causality; patient demographics; safety monitoring; and consequent changes in the conduct of the relevant study. Of the 55 items considered essential for ADE reporting, one item (event description) was present on all the forms. Seventy-eight percent of the instruments prompted for global introspection of the investigator, a method known to be unreliable. Of the 34 items that our panel of experts considered essential for event description, the median number of items present was four (domain = 1-11). The use of a validated tool to describe and assess event type, severity, and causality may lead to more timely, accurate identification of safety signals in cancer treatment.
引用
收藏
页码:231 / 236
页数:6
相关论文
共 31 条
[1]
[Anonymous], 2009, The Belmont Report: Ethical principles and guidelines for the protection of human subjects of research
[2]
[Anonymous], REP IND REV ACC YELL
[3]
[Anonymous], 1986, DRUG INF J
[4]
[Anonymous], MEDW FDA SAF INF ADV
[5]
Inter-expert agreement of seven criteria in causality assessment of adverse drug reactions [J].
Arimone, Yannick ;
Miremont-Salame, Ghada ;
Haramburu, Francoise ;
Molimard, Mathieu ;
Moore, Nicholas ;
Fourrier-Reglat, Annie ;
Begaud, Bernard .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY, 2007, 64 (04) :482-488
[6]
The Rresearch on Adverse Drug Events and Reports (RADAR) project [J].
Bennett, CL ;
Nebeker, JR ;
Lyons, EA ;
Samore, MH ;
Feldman, MD ;
McKoy, JM ;
Carson, KR ;
Belknap, SM ;
Trifilio, SM ;
Schumock, GT ;
Yarnold, PR ;
Davidson, CJ ;
Evens, AM ;
Kuzel, TM ;
Parada, JP ;
Cournoyer, D ;
West, DP ;
Sartor, O ;
Tallman, MS ;
Raisch, DW .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2005, 293 (17) :2131-2140
[7]
BRADFORDHILL A, 1965, P ROY SOC MED, V58, P295
[8]
Effects of coding dictionary on signal generation - A consideration of use of MedDRA compared with WHO-ART [J].
Brown, EG .
DRUG SAFETY, 2002, 25 (06) :445-452
[9]
CARPENTER D, 2005, HLTH AFF, V10, P1377
[10]
*EU MED AG, 2010, ICH TOP E2A CLIN SAF