Cargando…

Characteristics and temporal trends in patient registries: focus on the life sciences industry, 1981–2012

PURPOSE: Patient registries are used to monitor safety, examine real-world effectiveness, and may potentially contribute to comparative effectiveness research. To our knowledge, life sciences industry (LSI)-sponsored registries have not been systematically categorized. This study represents a first...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Travers, Karin, Sallum, Rachel H, Burns, Meghan D, Barr, Charles E, Beattie, Mary S, Pashos, Chris L, Luce, Bryan R
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4407929/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25079108
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pds.3643
_version_ 1782367986913378304
author Travers, Karin
Sallum, Rachel H
Burns, Meghan D
Barr, Charles E
Beattie, Mary S
Pashos, Chris L
Luce, Bryan R
author_facet Travers, Karin
Sallum, Rachel H
Burns, Meghan D
Barr, Charles E
Beattie, Mary S
Pashos, Chris L
Luce, Bryan R
author_sort Travers, Karin
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: Patient registries are used to monitor safety, examine real-world effectiveness, and may potentially contribute to comparative effectiveness research. To our knowledge, life sciences industry (LSI)-sponsored registries have not been systematically categorized. This study represents a first step toward understanding such registries over time. METHODS: Studies described as registries were identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov database. Characteristics from these registry records were abstracted and analyzed. RESULTS: Of 1202 registries identified, approximately 47% reported LSI sponsorship. These 562 LSI registries varied in focus: medical devices (n = 193, 34%), specific drugs (n = 173, 31%), procedures (n = 29, 5%), or particular diseases (n = 139, 25%). Thirty-three registries (<6%) evaluated pregnancy outcomes. The most common therapeutic area was cardiovascular (n = 234, 42%); others included endocrinology, immunology, oncology, musculoskeletal disorders, and neurology. The two most often measured outcomes were clinical effectiveness and safety, each of which appeared in 363/562 (65%) of LSI registries. Other outcomes included real-world clinical practice patterns (n = 122, 22%), patient-reported outcomes (n = 106, 19%), disease epidemiology/natural history (n = 69, 12%), and economic outcomes (n = 30, 5%). The number of LSI registries and their geographic diversity has increased over time. CONCLUSIONS: The LSI registries represent a substantial proportion of all patient registries documented in ClinicalTrials.gov. These prospective studies are growing in number and encompass diverse therapeutic areas and geographic regions. Most registries measure multiple outcomes and capture real-world data that may be unavailable through other study designs. This classification of LSI registries documents their use for studying heterogeneity of diseases, examining treatment patterns, measuring patient-reported outcomes, examining economic outcomes, and performing comparative effectiveness research. © 2014 The Authors. Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4407929
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Blackwell Publishing Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-44079292015-04-27 Characteristics and temporal trends in patient registries: focus on the life sciences industry, 1981–2012 Travers, Karin Sallum, Rachel H Burns, Meghan D Barr, Charles E Beattie, Mary S Pashos, Chris L Luce, Bryan R Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf Original Reports PURPOSE: Patient registries are used to monitor safety, examine real-world effectiveness, and may potentially contribute to comparative effectiveness research. To our knowledge, life sciences industry (LSI)-sponsored registries have not been systematically categorized. This study represents a first step toward understanding such registries over time. METHODS: Studies described as registries were identified in the ClinicalTrials.gov database. Characteristics from these registry records were abstracted and analyzed. RESULTS: Of 1202 registries identified, approximately 47% reported LSI sponsorship. These 562 LSI registries varied in focus: medical devices (n = 193, 34%), specific drugs (n = 173, 31%), procedures (n = 29, 5%), or particular diseases (n = 139, 25%). Thirty-three registries (<6%) evaluated pregnancy outcomes. The most common therapeutic area was cardiovascular (n = 234, 42%); others included endocrinology, immunology, oncology, musculoskeletal disorders, and neurology. The two most often measured outcomes were clinical effectiveness and safety, each of which appeared in 363/562 (65%) of LSI registries. Other outcomes included real-world clinical practice patterns (n = 122, 22%), patient-reported outcomes (n = 106, 19%), disease epidemiology/natural history (n = 69, 12%), and economic outcomes (n = 30, 5%). The number of LSI registries and their geographic diversity has increased over time. CONCLUSIONS: The LSI registries represent a substantial proportion of all patient registries documented in ClinicalTrials.gov. These prospective studies are growing in number and encompass diverse therapeutic areas and geographic regions. Most registries measure multiple outcomes and capture real-world data that may be unavailable through other study designs. This classification of LSI registries documents their use for studying heterogeneity of diseases, examining treatment patterns, measuring patient-reported outcomes, examining economic outcomes, and performing comparative effectiveness research. © 2014 The Authors. Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2015-04 2014-07-31 /pmc/articles/PMC4407929/ /pubmed/25079108 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pds.3643 Text en © 2014 The Authors. Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Original Reports
Travers, Karin
Sallum, Rachel H
Burns, Meghan D
Barr, Charles E
Beattie, Mary S
Pashos, Chris L
Luce, Bryan R
Characteristics and temporal trends in patient registries: focus on the life sciences industry, 1981–2012
title Characteristics and temporal trends in patient registries: focus on the life sciences industry, 1981–2012
title_full Characteristics and temporal trends in patient registries: focus on the life sciences industry, 1981–2012
title_fullStr Characteristics and temporal trends in patient registries: focus on the life sciences industry, 1981–2012
title_full_unstemmed Characteristics and temporal trends in patient registries: focus on the life sciences industry, 1981–2012
title_short Characteristics and temporal trends in patient registries: focus on the life sciences industry, 1981–2012
title_sort characteristics and temporal trends in patient registries: focus on the life sciences industry, 1981–2012
topic Original Reports
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4407929/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25079108
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pds.3643
work_keys_str_mv AT traverskarin characteristicsandtemporaltrendsinpatientregistriesfocusonthelifesciencesindustry19812012
AT sallumrachelh characteristicsandtemporaltrendsinpatientregistriesfocusonthelifesciencesindustry19812012
AT burnsmeghand characteristicsandtemporaltrendsinpatientregistriesfocusonthelifesciencesindustry19812012
AT barrcharlese characteristicsandtemporaltrendsinpatientregistriesfocusonthelifesciencesindustry19812012
AT beattiemarys characteristicsandtemporaltrendsinpatientregistriesfocusonthelifesciencesindustry19812012
AT pashoschrisl characteristicsandtemporaltrendsinpatientregistriesfocusonthelifesciencesindustry19812012
AT lucebryanr characteristicsandtemporaltrendsinpatientregistriesfocusonthelifesciencesindustry19812012