Ciani Oriana, Buyse Marc, Drummond Michael, Rasi Guido, Saad Everardo D, Taylor Rod S
Evidence Synthesis and Modelling for Health Improvement, Institute of Health Research, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK; Centre for Research on Health and Social Care Management, Bocconi University, Milan, Italy.
International Drug Development Institute, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium; CluePoints, Inc., Cambridge, MA, USA.
Value Health. 2017 Mar;20(3):487-495. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2016.10.011. Epub 2016 Dec 22.
The efficacy of medicines, medical devices, and other health technologies should be proved in trials that assess final patient-relevant outcomes such as survival or morbidity. Market access and coverage decisions are, however, often based on surrogate end points, biomarkers, or intermediate end points, which aim to substitute and predict patient-relevant outcomes that are unavailable because of methodological, financial, or practical constraints. We provide a summary of the present use of surrogate end points in health care policy, discussing the case for and against their adoption and reviewing validation methods. We introduce a three-step framework for policymakers to handle surrogates, which involves establishing the level of evidence, assessing the strength of the association, and quantifying relations between surrogates and final outcomes. Although the use of surrogates can be problematic, they can, when selected and validated appropriately, offer important opportunities for more efficient clinical trials and faster access to new health technologies that benefit patients and health care systems.
药物、医疗器械及其他卫生技术的疗效应在评估诸如生存或发病率等与患者最终相关结局的试验中得到验证。然而,市场准入和覆盖范围的决策往往基于替代终点、生物标志物或中间终点,这些指标旨在替代和预测由于方法学、资金或实际限制而无法获得的与患者相关的结局。我们总结了替代终点在卫生保健政策中的当前应用情况,讨论了采用替代终点的利弊,并回顾了验证方法。我们为政策制定者引入了一个处理替代指标的三步框架,包括确定证据水平、评估关联强度以及量化替代指标与最终结局之间的关系。尽管使用替代指标可能存在问题,但如果选择和验证得当,它们可以为更高效的临床试验以及更快获得使患者和卫生保健系统受益的新卫生技术提供重要机会。