Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1942/18771
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorPavlovic, Mira-
dc.contributor.authorTeljeur, Conor-
dc.contributor.authorWieseler, Beate-
dc.contributor.authorKlemp, Marianne-
dc.contributor.authorCLEEMPUT, Irina-
dc.contributor.authorNeyt, Mattias-
dc.date.accessioned2015-04-23T12:53:29Z-
dc.date.available2015-04-23T12:53:29Z-
dc.date.issued2014-
dc.identifier.citationINTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT IN HEALTH CARE, 30 (5), p. 508-513-
dc.identifier.issn0266-4623-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1942/18771-
dc.description.abstractObjectives: Clinical endpoints are defined as valid measures of clinical benefit or harm due to treatment, that describe the impact of treatment on how a patient feels, functions, and survives. The choice of endpoints and the manner in which they are reported have a major impact on the relative effectiveness assessment (REA) of pharmaceuticals. The aim of this article is to describe the guideline development process and the key findings that set a framework for appropriate use of endpoints in REAs in Europe. Methods: A multi-health technology assessment (HTA)-agency collaborative process in EUnetHTA JA1 was used to scope, draft, and finalize methodological guidelines for REA in Europe. Results: Patient-relevant clinical endpoints can be broadly categorized into: mortality, morbidity and health-related quality of life. A clinical endpoint is a main symptom or sign of a disease that is clinically relevant, valid, reproducible and responsive to change. Preference is for long-term or final endpoints whenever possible. Surrogate endpoints may be used when there is compelling evidence of a clear and consistent correlation of treatment effects on the surrogate and final outcome of interest. Conclusions: The relevance and hierarchy of the different types of clinical endpoints depend on the research question, disease, and the treatment investigated. Not only the primary endpoint, but also other relevant endpoints are assessed in comparison to adequate comparator(s). This simultaneous assessment of all relevant endpoints is a hallmark of REA.-
dc.description.sponsorshipEUnetHTA Joint Action was supported by a grant from the European Commission, Agreement number 2009 23 02. The sole responsibility of this article lies with the author(s) and neither the Commission nor EUnetHTA is responsible for any use that may be made of the information contained therein. We are thankful to all partners from HTA agencies, members of the EUnetHTA that helped the elaboration of guidelines as well as external experts and pharmaceutical companies for their review and comments. We are thankful to Ms Margareth Galbraith for having reviewed the text of the article. Source of funding: Guidelines development was supported both by European Commission funding of EUnetHTA Joint Action 1 (50 percent) and funding of each participating HTA organization (50 percent).-
dc.language.isoen-
dc.publisherCAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS-
dc.rightsCopyright © Cambridge University Press 2015-
dc.subject.otherRelative effectiveness assessment; Clinical endpoints; Patient-relevant endpoints-
dc.subject.otherrelative effectiveness assessment; clinical endpoints; patient-relevant endpoints-
dc.titleEndpoints for relative effectiveness assessment (REA) of pharmaceuticals-
dc.typeJournal Contribution-
dc.identifier.epage513-
dc.identifier.issue5-
dc.identifier.spage508-
dc.identifier.volume30-
local.format.pages6-
local.bibliographicCitation.jcatA1-
dc.description.notes[Pavlovic, Mira] Haute Autor Sante, F-93218 La Plaine St Denis, St Denis La Pla, France. [Teljeur, Conor] Hlth Informat & Qual Author, Dublin, Ireland. [Wieseler, Beate] Inst Qual & Efficiency Hlth Care, Cologne, Germany. [Klemp, Marianne] Norwegian Knowledge Ctr Hlth Serv, Oslo, Norway. [Cleemput, Irina; Neyt, Mattias] Belgian Hlth Care Knowledge Ctr, Brussels, Belgium. [Cleemput, Irina] Hasselt Univ, Diepenbeek, Belgium.-
local.publisher.placeNEW YORK-
local.type.refereedRefereed-
local.type.specifiedArticle-
dc.identifier.doi10.1017/S0266462314000592-
dc.identifier.isi000351057600006-
item.fulltextNo Fulltext-
item.accessRightsClosed Access-
item.validationecoom 2016-
item.contributorPavlovic, Mira-
item.contributorTeljeur, Conor-
item.contributorWieseler, Beate-
item.contributorKlemp, Marianne-
item.contributorCLEEMPUT, Irina-
item.contributorNeyt, Mattias-
item.fullcitationPavlovic, Mira; Teljeur, Conor; Wieseler, Beate; Klemp, Marianne; CLEEMPUT, Irina & Neyt, Mattias (2014) Endpoints for relative effectiveness assessment (REA) of pharmaceuticals. In: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT IN HEALTH CARE, 30 (5), p. 508-513.-
crisitem.journal.issn0266-4623-
crisitem.journal.eissn1471-6348-
Appears in Collections:Research publications
Show simple item record

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

8
checked on Sep 3, 2020

WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations

10
checked on Sep 28, 2024

Page view(s)

82
checked on Apr 17, 2023

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.