Patient-Reported Outcome (PRO) Assessment in Clinical Trials: A Systematic Review of Guidance for Trial Protocol Writers

被引:54
|
作者
Calvert, Melanie [1 ,2 ]
Kyte, Derek [1 ,3 ]
Duffy, Helen [1 ]
Gheorghe, Adrian [4 ]
Mercieca-Bebber, Rebecca [5 ]
Ives, Jonathan [6 ]
Draper, Heather [2 ,6 ]
Brundage, Michael [7 ]
Blazeby, Jane [8 ]
King, Madeleine [5 ]
机构
[1] Univ Birmingham, Birmingham, W Midlands, England
[2] MRC Midland Hub Trials Methodol Res, Birmingham, W Midlands, England
[3] Univ Birmingham, Sch Sport Exercise & Rehabil, Birmingham, W Midlands, England
[4] London Sch Hyg & Trop Med, Dept Global Hlth & Dev, London WC1, England
[5] Univ Sydney, Psychooncol Cooperat Res Grp, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia
[6] Univ Birmingham, Birmingham, W Midlands, England
[7] Queens Univ, Kingston, ON, Canada
[8] Univ Bristol, Sch Social & Community Med, MRC ConDuCT Hub Trials Methodol Res 2, Bristol, Avon, England
来源
PLOS ONE | 2014年 / 9卷 / 10期
基金
英国医学研究理事会;
关键词
QUALITY-OF-LIFE; NATIONAL-CANCER-INSTITUTE; RANDOMIZED-TRIALS; ISSUES; INTEGRATION; EXAMPLE; CLAIMS;
D O I
10.1371/journal.pone.0110216
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
Background: Evidence suggests there are inconsistencies in patient-reported outcome (PRO) assessment and reporting in clinical trials, which may limit the use of these data to inform patient care. For trials with a PRO endpoint, routine inclusion of key PRO information in the protocol may help improve trial conduct and the reporting and appraisal of PRO results; however, it is currently unclear exactly what PRO-specific information should be included. The aim of this review was to summarize the current PRO-specific guidance for clinical trial protocol developers. Methods and Findings: We searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINHAL and Cochrane Library databases (inception to February 2013) for PRO-specific guidance regarding trial protocol development. Further guidance documents were identified via Google, Google scholar, requests to members of the UK Clinical Research Collaboration registered clinical trials units and international experts. Two independent investigators undertook title/abstract screening, full text review and data extraction, with a third involved in the event of disagreement. 21,175 citations were screened and 54 met the inclusion criteria. Guidance documents were difficult to access: electronic database searches identified just 8 documents, with the remaining 46 sourced elsewhere (5 from citation tracking, 27 from hand searching, 7 from the grey literature review and 7 from experts). 162 unique PRO-specific protocol recommendations were extracted from included documents. A further 10 PRO recommendations were identified relating to supporting trial documentation. Only 5/162 (3%) recommendations appeared in >= 50% of guidance documents reviewed, indicating a lack of consistency. Conclusions: PRO-specific protocol guidelines were difficult to access, lacked consistency and may be challenging to implement in practice. There is a need to develop easily accessible consensus-driven PRO protocol guidance. Guidance should be aimed at ensuring key PRO information is routinely included in appropriate trial protocols, in order to facilitate rigorous collection/reporting of PRO data, to effectively inform patient care.
引用
收藏
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Patient-Reported outcome (PRO) assessment in clinical trials: a systematic review of guidance for trial protocol writers
    Calvert, Melanie
    Kyte, Derek
    Duffy, Helen
    Gheorghe, Adrian
    Mercieca-Bebber, Rebecca L.
    Ives, Jonathan C. S.
    Draper, Heather
    Brundage, Michael
    Blazeby, Jane
    King, Madeleine T.
    [J]. QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2014, 23 : 97 - 97
  • [2] International guidance on the selection of patient-reported outcome measures in clinical trials: a review
    Norah L. Crossnohere
    Michael Brundage
    Melanie J. Calvert
    Madeleine King
    Bryce B. Reeve
    Elissa Thorner
    Albert W. Wu
    Claire Snyder
    [J]. Quality of Life Research, 2021, 30 : 21 - 40
  • [3] International guidance on the selection of patient-reported outcome measures in clinical trials: a review
    Crossnohere, Norah L.
    Brundage, Michael
    Calvert, Melanie J.
    King, Madeleine
    Reeve, Bryce B.
    Thorner, Elissa
    Wu, Albert W.
    Snyder, Claire
    [J]. QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2021, 30 (01) : 21 - 40
  • [4] The impact of patient-reported outcome (PRO) data from clinical trials: a systematic review and critical analysis
    Rivera, Samantha Cruz
    Kyte, Derek G.
    Aiyegbusi, Olalekan Lee
    Slade, Anita L.
    McMullan, Christel
    Calvert, Melanie J.
    [J]. HEALTH AND QUALITY OF LIFE OUTCOMES, 2019, 17 (01)
  • [5] The impact of patient-reported outcome (PRO) data from clinical trials: a systematic review and critical analysis
    Rivera, Samantha Cruz
    Kyte, Derek
    Aiyegbusi, Olalekan Lee
    Slade, Anita
    McMullan, Christel
    Calvert, Melanie
    [J]. TRIALS, 2019, 20
  • [6] The impact of patient-reported outcome (PRO) data from clinical trials: a systematic review and critical analysis
    Samantha Cruz Rivera
    Derek G. Kyte
    Olalekan Lee Aiyegbusi
    Anita L. Slade
    Christel McMullan
    Melanie J. Calvert
    [J]. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 17
  • [7] The impact of patient-reported outcome (PRO) data from clinical trials: a systematic review and critical analysis
    Rivera, Samantha Cruz
    Kyte, Derek
    Aiyegbusi, Olalekan Lee
    Slade, Anita
    McMullan, Christel
    Calvert, Melanie
    [J]. QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2019, 28 : S112 - S113
  • [8] Systematic evaluation of Patient-Reported Outcome (PRO) protocol content and reporting in cancer clinical trials: the EPiC study
    Kyte, Derek G.
    Retzer, Ameeta
    Keeley, Thomas
    Ahmed, Khaled
    Armes, Jo
    Brown, Julia M.
    Calman, Lynn
    Copland, Chris
    Efficace, Fabio
    Gavin, Anna
    Glaser, Adam
    Greenfield, Diana M.
    Lanceley, Anne
    Taylor, Rachel M.
    Velikova, Galina
    Brundage, Michael
    Mercieca-Bebber, Rebecca
    King, Madeleine T.
    Calvert, Melanie J.
    [J]. QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2017, 26 (01) : 55 - 56
  • [9] Systematic evaluation of patient-reported outcome (PRO) protocol content and reporting in cancer clinical trials: the EPiC study
    Kyte, Derek
    Retzer, Ameeta
    Ahmed, Khaled
    Keeley, Thomas
    Armes, Jo
    Brown, Julia M.
    Calman, Lynn
    Efficace, Fabio
    Gavin, Anna
    Glaser, Adam
    Greenfield, Diana M.
    Lanceley, Anne
    Taylor, Rachel M.
    Velikova, Galina
    Brundage, Michael
    Mercieca-Bebber, Rebecca
    King, Madeleine T.
    Turner, Grace
    Calvert, Melanie
    [J]. QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2018, 27 : S35 - S35
  • [10] Systematic Evaluation of the Patient-Reported Outcome (PRO) Content of Clinical Trial Protocols
    Kyte, Derek
    Duffy, Helen
    Fletcher, Benjamin
    Gheorghe, Adrian
    Mercieca-Bebber, Rebecca
    King, Madeleine
    Draper, Heather
    Ives, Jonathan
    Brundage, Michael
    Blazeby, Jane
    Calvert, Melanie
    [J]. PLOS ONE, 2014, 9 (10):