Cargando…

Net Efficacy Adjusted for Risk (NEAR): A Simple Procedure for Measuring Risk:Benefit Balance

BACKGROUND: Although several mathematical models have been proposed to assess the risk:benefit of drugs in one measure, their use in practice has been rather limited. Our objective was to design a simple, easily applicable model. In this respect, measuring the proportion of patients who respond favo...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Boada, José N., Boada, Carlos, García-Sáiz, Mar, García, Marcelino, Fernández, Eduardo, Gómez, Eugenio
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2008
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2570485/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18974868
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0003580
_version_ 1782160138447093760
author Boada, José N.
Boada, Carlos
García-Sáiz, Mar
García, Marcelino
Fernández, Eduardo
Gómez, Eugenio
author_facet Boada, José N.
Boada, Carlos
García-Sáiz, Mar
García, Marcelino
Fernández, Eduardo
Gómez, Eugenio
author_sort Boada, José N.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Although several mathematical models have been proposed to assess the risk:benefit of drugs in one measure, their use in practice has been rather limited. Our objective was to design a simple, easily applicable model. In this respect, measuring the proportion of patients who respond favorably to treatment without being affected by adverse drug reactions (ADR) could be a suitable endpoint. However, remarkably few published clinical trials report the data required to calculate this proportion. As an approach to the problem, we calculated the expected proportion of this type of patients. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Theoretically, responders without ADR may be obtained by multiplying the total number of responders by the total number of subjects that did not suffer ADR, and dividing the product by the total number of subjects studied. When two drugs are studied, the same calculation may be repeated for the second drug. Then, by constructing a 2×2 table with the expected frequencies of responders with and without ADR, and non-responders with and without ADR, the odds ratio and relative risk with their confidence intervals may be easily calculated and graphically represented on a logarithmic scale. Such measures represent “net efficacy adjusted for risk” (NEAR). We assayed the model with results extracted from several published clinical trials or meta-analyses. On comparing our results with those originally reported by the authors, marked differences were found in some cases, with ADR arising as a relevant factor to balance the clinical benefit obtained. The particular features of the adverse reaction that must be weighed against benefit is discussed in the paper. CONCLUSION: NEAR representing overall risk-benefit may contribute to improving knowledge of drug clinical usefulness. As most published clinical trials tend to overestimate benefits and underestimate toxicity, our measure represents an effort to change this trend.
format Text
id pubmed-2570485
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2008
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-25704852008-10-31 Net Efficacy Adjusted for Risk (NEAR): A Simple Procedure for Measuring Risk:Benefit Balance Boada, José N. Boada, Carlos García-Sáiz, Mar García, Marcelino Fernández, Eduardo Gómez, Eugenio PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: Although several mathematical models have been proposed to assess the risk:benefit of drugs in one measure, their use in practice has been rather limited. Our objective was to design a simple, easily applicable model. In this respect, measuring the proportion of patients who respond favorably to treatment without being affected by adverse drug reactions (ADR) could be a suitable endpoint. However, remarkably few published clinical trials report the data required to calculate this proportion. As an approach to the problem, we calculated the expected proportion of this type of patients. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Theoretically, responders without ADR may be obtained by multiplying the total number of responders by the total number of subjects that did not suffer ADR, and dividing the product by the total number of subjects studied. When two drugs are studied, the same calculation may be repeated for the second drug. Then, by constructing a 2×2 table with the expected frequencies of responders with and without ADR, and non-responders with and without ADR, the odds ratio and relative risk with their confidence intervals may be easily calculated and graphically represented on a logarithmic scale. Such measures represent “net efficacy adjusted for risk” (NEAR). We assayed the model with results extracted from several published clinical trials or meta-analyses. On comparing our results with those originally reported by the authors, marked differences were found in some cases, with ADR arising as a relevant factor to balance the clinical benefit obtained. The particular features of the adverse reaction that must be weighed against benefit is discussed in the paper. CONCLUSION: NEAR representing overall risk-benefit may contribute to improving knowledge of drug clinical usefulness. As most published clinical trials tend to overestimate benefits and underestimate toxicity, our measure represents an effort to change this trend. Public Library of Science 2008-10-31 /pmc/articles/PMC2570485/ /pubmed/18974868 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0003580 Text en Boada et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Boada, José N.
Boada, Carlos
García-Sáiz, Mar
García, Marcelino
Fernández, Eduardo
Gómez, Eugenio
Net Efficacy Adjusted for Risk (NEAR): A Simple Procedure for Measuring Risk:Benefit Balance
title Net Efficacy Adjusted for Risk (NEAR): A Simple Procedure for Measuring Risk:Benefit Balance
title_full Net Efficacy Adjusted for Risk (NEAR): A Simple Procedure for Measuring Risk:Benefit Balance
title_fullStr Net Efficacy Adjusted for Risk (NEAR): A Simple Procedure for Measuring Risk:Benefit Balance
title_full_unstemmed Net Efficacy Adjusted for Risk (NEAR): A Simple Procedure for Measuring Risk:Benefit Balance
title_short Net Efficacy Adjusted for Risk (NEAR): A Simple Procedure for Measuring Risk:Benefit Balance
title_sort net efficacy adjusted for risk (near): a simple procedure for measuring risk:benefit balance
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2570485/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18974868
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0003580
work_keys_str_mv AT boadajosen netefficacyadjustedforrisknearasimpleprocedureformeasuringriskbenefitbalance
AT boadacarlos netefficacyadjustedforrisknearasimpleprocedureformeasuringriskbenefitbalance
AT garciasaizmar netefficacyadjustedforrisknearasimpleprocedureformeasuringriskbenefitbalance
AT garciamarcelino netefficacyadjustedforrisknearasimpleprocedureformeasuringriskbenefitbalance
AT fernandezeduardo netefficacyadjustedforrisknearasimpleprocedureformeasuringriskbenefitbalance
AT gomezeugenio netefficacyadjustedforrisknearasimpleprocedureformeasuringriskbenefitbalance