Evidence-based medicine and rare diseases

Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology

Volumn 686, Issue , 2010, Pages 41-53

  Day, Simon ^a  

^a ROCHE PRODUCTS LTD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Bias; Bradford Hill; Evidence; Meta analysis; Patient preference; Precision

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; DRUG RESEARCH; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; HEALTH CARE ACCESS; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; INFORMED CONSENT; INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION; MEDICAL INFORMATION; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); OFF LABEL DRUG USE; PATIENT DECISION MAKING; PATIENT SAFETY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY CONTROL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); RARE DISEASE; RELIABILITY; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK BENEFIT ANALYSIS; SYSTEMATIC ERROR; EXPERT WITNESS; METHODOLOGY; PATIENT PREFERENCE; REVIEW; STANDARD; STATISTICS;

EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; EXPERT TESTIMONY; HUMANS; META-ANALYSIS AS TOPIC; PATIENT PREFERENCE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; RARE DISEASES;

EID: 79952067025     PISSN: 00652598     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1007/978-90-481-9485-8_3     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Booth B, Glassman R, Ma P (2003) Oncology's trials. Nat Rev Drug Discov 2:609-610
2. Chalmers TC (1968) When should randomisation begin? Lancet 1(7547):858
3. Chalmers TC (1975) Randomization of the first patient. Med Clin North Am 59:1035-1038
4. Chalmers TC (1977) Randomize the first patient! N Engl J Med 296:107
5. Committee forMedicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) (2006) Guideline on clinical trials in small populations. European Medicines Agency, London
6. Day S (2009) Bayesian statistics. DIA Global Forum 1(6):34-35
7. DiMasi JA (2001) Risks in new drug development: Approval success rates for investigational drugs. Clin Pharm Therap 69:297-307 (Pubitemid 32477070)
8. GovTrack.US (2005) United States Senate Bill S.1956 - 109th Congress. To amend the Federal Food, drug and Cosmetic Act to create a new three-tiered approval system for drugs, biological products, and devices that is responsive to the needs of seriously ill patients, and for other purposes. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s109-1956. Cited 31 December 2009
9. GRADE Working Group (2004) Grading quality of evidence and strength of association. Brit Med J 328:1490-1494
10. Green SB, Byar DP (1984) Using observational data from registries to compare treatments: The fallacy of omnimetrics. Stat Med 3:361-370 (Pubitemid 15167910)
11. Hill AB (1951) The clinical trial. Brit Med Bull 7:278-282
12. Hill AB (1965) The environment and disease: Association or causation? Proc Roy Soc Med 58:295-300
13. Kola I, Landis J (2004) Can the pharmaceutical industry reduce attrition rates? Nat Rev Drug Discov 3:711-715 (Pubitemid 39173511)
14. Malenka DJ, Baron JA, Johansen S, Wahrenberger JW, Ross JM (1993) The framing effect of relative and absolute risk. J Gen Int Med 8:543-548 (Pubitemid 23312931)
15. Mangset M, Berge E, Fø rde R, Nessa J, Wyller TB (2009) "Two per cent isn't a lot, but when it comes to death it seems quite a lot anyway": Patients' perception of risk and willingness to accept risks associated with thrombolytic drug treatment for acute stroke. J Med Ethics 35:42-46
16. Matthews JNS (1995) Small clinical trials: Are they all bad? Stat Med 14:115-126
17. Mussen F, Salek S, Walker S (2009) Benefit-risk appraisal of medicines. A systematic approach to decision-making. Wiley-Blackwell, Chichester
18. Okie S (2006) Access before approval - a right to take experimental drugs? N Engl J Med 355:437-440 (Pubitemid 44162269)
19. Pearson H (2006) The bitterest pill. Nature 444:532-533
20. Phillips CV (2001) The economics of 'more research is needed'. Int J Epidem 30: 771-776
21. Piantadosi S (1990) Editorial. Hazards of small clinical trials. J Clin Oncol 8:1-3 (Pubitemid 20032438)
22. Po LW (1998) Dictionary of evidence based medicine. Radcliffe Medical Press, Oxford
23. Reidenberg MM (1987) Should unevaluated therapies be available for sale? Clin Pharmacol Ther 42:599-600 (Pubitemid 18025769)
24. Sackett DL, Rosenberg WMC, Gray JAM, Haynes RB, Richardson WS (1996) Editorial. Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it is not. Brit Med J 312:71-72
25. Saver JL (1995) Coping with an embarrassment of riches. Stroke 26:1289-1292
26. Schünemann HJ, Oxman AD, Vist GE, Higgins JPT, Deeks JJ, Glasziou, Guyatt G (2008) Interpreting results and drawing conclusions. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (eds) Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Wiley, Chichester
27. Society for Clinical Trials Board of Directors (2006) The Society for Clinical Trials opposes US legislation to permit marketing of unproven medical therapies for seriously ill patients. Clin Trials 3:154-157
28. Spodick DH (1983) Randomize the first patient: Scientific, ethical, and behavioral bases. Am J Cardiol 51:916-917 (Pubitemid 13141997)
29. Sutton AJ, Abrams KR, Jones DR, Sheldon TA, Song F (2000) Methods for meta-analysis in medical research. Wiley, Chichester.
30. Tan S-B, Dear KBG, Bruzzi P, Machin D (2003) Strategy for randomised clinical trials in rare cancers. Brit Med J 327:47-49 (Pubitemid 36801898)
31. United States Department of Health and Human Services (2009) Code of Federal Regulations 21 CFR 314.126. Adequate and well controlled studies. http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/CFRSearch.cfm. Cited 31st December 2009
32. Whitehead A (2002) Meta-analysis of controlled clinical trials. Wiley, Chichester