Liu Fu-Mei, Xie Yan-Ming, Wang Zhi-Fei, Zhang Qiang, Cui Xin
Institute of Basic Research in Clinical Medicine, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences Beijing 100700, China.
Zhongguo Zhong Yao Za Zhi. 2022 Mar;47(6):1493-1500. doi: 10.19540/j.cnki.cjcmm.20211207.501.
This clinical value-oriented comprehensive evaluation of drugs was carried out in accordance with Guidelines for Management of Comprehensive Clinical Evaluation of Drugs(trial version 2021), with the qualitative and quantitative evaluation methods adopted. Based on the evidence-based medicine, epidemiology, clinical medicine, pharmacoeconomics, mathematical statistics, and health technology evaluation(HTA), the clinical value of Ginkgolide Injection was evaluated from the "6+1" dimension by giving weight to the criterion level and index level and calculating with multi-criteria decision analysis(MCDA) model and CSC v2.0. After entering the market, Ginkgolide Injection has been subjected to phase Ⅳ clinical trial, spontaneous reporting system(SRS)-based data monitoring, systematic review and Meta-analysis, acute toxicity and long-term toxicity assays, active monitoring, and RCTs, and the evidence of safety was sufficient. The results of active monitoring showed that the incidence of adverse reactions was 0.09%(rare), mainly manifested as flushing, dizziness, rash, nausea, and vomiting. According to the nested case-control study, the adverse reactions of this drug had nothing to do with the product batch, implying that the drug quality was controllable. The adverse reactions mainly resulted from the pharmacodynamic reactions. Because the drug was effective in resisting platelet aggregation, the resulting adverse reactions such as flushing, dizziness, headache, and phlebitis were caused by vasodilation. Skin rash and gastrointestinal symptoms were mainly attributed to the patients' sensitivity to drugs and their own allergic constitution. According to the sufficiency of evidence and the incidence of adverse reactions in the safety research, the safety of Ginkgolide Injection was grade A. The results of Meta-analysis showed that Ginkgolide Injection combined with conventional western medicine was superior to conventional western medicine in improving the clinical effective rate, neurological function score, and activity of daily living score of patients with cerebral infarction. The validity evidence was evaluated according to the PICO principle to be high. According to the GREAD evaluation principle, the quality of such evidence as clinical effective rate, National Institute of Health stroke scale(NIHSS), and Barthel Index(BI) was evaluated, and the results demonstrated that the evidence quality of clinical effective rate and activity of daily living score was medium. The effectiveness of Ginkgolide Injection was grade A. According to the economic report of Ginkgolide Injection, it had short-term and long-term pharmacoeconomic advantages in the treatment of ischemic stroke, and the economic evidence value was good. According to the CASP economic evaluation checklist, the overall quality evaluation results of the economic report are basically clear. To be specific, the economic evidence quality was high. Based on the comprehensive economic evidence quality and economic value, the economy of this drug was grade A. The innovation of this product was evaluated from three aspects: clinical innovation, enterprise service system innovation, and industrial innovation. Ginkgolide Injection could be used 24 h after intravenous thrombolysis for improving patients' neurological function without increasing bleeding, indicating its important clinical innovation. There were many innovations in ensuring drug supply, especially at the grass roots, drug safety, effectiveness, and reasonable price, which has provided reference for establishing enterprise philosophy, managing drug resources, developing process and technology, and determining enterprise management and marketing. Therefore, its innovation was grade A. The drug had no special medication plan in use, exhibiting good suitability for doctors, nurses, and patients. The suitability was grade B. Compared with similar drugs, its price was at a medium level, meaning good affordability, sufficient production capacity, and easy accessibility. Its accessibility was therefore grade B. This drug belonged to Chinese medicinal injection. The large-sample real-world research revealed rich human use experience, so it was grade C for the traditional Chinese medicine characteristic. According to the comprehensive evaluation, the clinical value of Ginkgolide Injection in the treatment of cerebral infarction fell into class A. It is suggested that it can be transformed into the relevant policy results of basic clinical medication management according to the procedure.
本药物临床价值导向的综合评价按照《药物临床综合评价管理指南(2021年试行版)》开展,采用定性与定量评价方法。基于循证医学、流行病学、临床医学、药物经济学、数理统计学及卫生技术评估(HTA),从“6+1”维度,通过对准则层和指标层赋权,运用多准则决策分析(MCDA)模型及CSC v2.0对银杏内酯注射液的临床价值进行评价。银杏内酯注射液上市后历经Ⅳ期临床试验、基于自发报告系统(SRS)的数据监测、系统评价与Meta分析、急性毒性和长期毒性试验、主动监测及随机对照试验(RCT),安全性证据充分。主动监测结果显示,不良反应发生率为0.09%(罕见),主要表现为潮红、头晕、皮疹、恶心、呕吐。根据巢式病例对照研究,该药物不良反应与产品批次无关,提示药品质量可控。不良反应主要源于药效学反应。因该药物抗血小板聚集有效,引发的潮红、头晕、头痛及静脉炎等不良反应是由血管扩张所致。皮疹及胃肠道症状主要归因于患者对药物的敏感性及自身过敏体质。根据安全性研究中的证据充分性及不良反应发生率,银杏内酯注射液安全性为A级。Meta分析结果显示,银杏内酯注射液联合西医常规治疗在提高脑梗死患者临床有效率、神经功能评分及日常生活活动能力评分方面优于西医常规治疗。依据PICO原则评估有效性证据为高等级。按照GRADE评估原则,对临床有效率、美国国立卫生研究院卒中量表(NIHSS)、巴氏指数(BI)等证据质量进行评价,结果显示临床有效率及日常生活活动能力评分的证据质量为中等。银杏内酯注射液有效性为A级。根据银杏内酯注射液的经济学报告,其在缺血性脑卒中治疗中具有短期和长期的药物经济学优势,经济证据价值良好。按照CASP经济学评价清单,经济学报告整体质量评价结果基本清晰,具体而言,经济证据质量为高等级。基于综合经济证据质量及经济价值,该药物经济性为A级。从临床创新、企业服务体系创新及产业创新三个方面对该产品创新性进行评价。银杏内酯注射液可在静脉溶栓24小时后使用以改善患者神经功能且不增加出血风险,显示出重要的临床创新性。在保障药品供应方面有诸多创新,尤其在基层,药品安全、有效且价格合理,为确立企业理念、管理药品资源、开发工艺技术及确定企业管理与营销提供了参考。因此,其创新性为A级。该药物在使用中无特殊用药方案,对医生、护士及患者显示出良好的适用性,适用性为B级。与同类药物相比,其价格处于中等水平,意味着可承受性良好、生产能力充足且可及性强,因此其可及性为B级。本药物属于中药注射剂,大样本真实世界研究揭示了丰富的人体使用经验,故其中药特性为C级。综合评价,银杏内酯注射液治疗脑梗死的临床价值为A级。建议可按程序转化为基层临床用药管理的相关政策成果。