Patient-Reported Outcomes: Open-Label Trials Can Be Designed To Minimize Bias, US FDA Says
With the expectation for increasing amounts of patient experience data comes the need for the FDA and sponsors to consider, and account for, the degree to which open-label bias influences oncology trial PROs; agency staff suggest trial design elements and analytic approaches for dealing with bias at a meeting on cancer clinical outcomes assessments.
You may also be interested in...
In exploratory FDA analyses, PRO data appeared more sensitive at detecting an exposure-toxicity relationship for an oral small molecule cancer drug than clinician-reported data; Project Optimus representative dispels industry concerns that FDA wants firms to find the 'mythical' optimal dose.
Heterogeneity in PRO assessment strategies has lessened the regulatory utility of such data from cancer trials, the agency says; new draft guidance recommends systematic assessment of a core set of PROs in registrational studies using fit-for-purpose tools and includes examples of acceptable instruments.
Access to expedited regulatory pathways, marketing exclusivity and tax credits in exchange for enrolling and retaining diverse clinical trial populations could provide a ‘carrot’ to the ‘stick’ in US FDA guidance and legislative proposals; attorneys Sarah Thompson Schick and Winston Kirton also call for a re-examination of concerns about remuneration for trial participants.