Digital health technology derived measures : Biomarkers or clinical outcome assessments?
© 2023 The Authors. Clinical and Translational Science published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics..
Digital health technologies (DHTs) present unique opportunities for clinical evidence generation but pose certain challenges. These challenges stem, in part, from existing definitions of drug development tools, which were not created with DHT-derived measures in mind. DHT-derived measures can be leveraged as either clinical outcome assessments (COAs) or as biomarkers since they share properties with both categories of drug development tools. Examples from the literature indicate a variety of applications for DHT-derived data, including capturing disease physiology, symptom tracking, or response to therapies. The distinction between the categorization of DHT-derived measures as COAs or as biomarkers can be very fine, with terminology variability among regulatory authorities. This has significant implications for integration of DHT-derived measures in clinical trials, leading to confusion regarding the evidence required to support these tools' use in drug development. There is a need to amend definitions and create clear evidentiary requirements to support broad adoption of these new and innovative tools. The biopharma industry, the technology sector, consulting businesses, academic researchers, and regulators need a dialogue via multi-stakeholder collaborations to clarify questions around DHT-derived measures, to unify definitions, and to create the foundations for evidentiary package requirements, providing a path forward to predictable results.
| Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
|---|
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2023 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2023 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:16 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
Clinical and translational science - 16(2023), 7 vom: 19. Juli, Seite 1113-1120 |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Izmailova, Elena S [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
|---|
| Themen: |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
Date Completed 19.10.2023 Date Revised 19.10.2023 published: Print-Electronic Citation Status MEDLINE |
|---|
| doi: |
10.1111/cts.13529 |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
NLM356223787 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000naa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLM356223787 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20231226070018.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 231226s2023 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1111/cts.13529 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a pubmed24n1187.xml |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLM356223787 | ||
| 035 | |a (NLM)37118983 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Izmailova, Elena S |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Digital health technology derived measures |b Biomarkers or clinical outcome assessments? |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2023 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ƒaComputermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a ƒa Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a Date Completed 19.10.2023 | ||
| 500 | |a Date Revised 19.10.2023 | ||
| 500 | |a published: Print-Electronic | ||
| 500 | |a Citation Status MEDLINE | ||
| 520 | |a © 2023 The Authors. Clinical and Translational Science published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics. | ||
| 520 | |a Digital health technologies (DHTs) present unique opportunities for clinical evidence generation but pose certain challenges. These challenges stem, in part, from existing definitions of drug development tools, which were not created with DHT-derived measures in mind. DHT-derived measures can be leveraged as either clinical outcome assessments (COAs) or as biomarkers since they share properties with both categories of drug development tools. Examples from the literature indicate a variety of applications for DHT-derived data, including capturing disease physiology, symptom tracking, or response to therapies. The distinction between the categorization of DHT-derived measures as COAs or as biomarkers can be very fine, with terminology variability among regulatory authorities. This has significant implications for integration of DHT-derived measures in clinical trials, leading to confusion regarding the evidence required to support these tools' use in drug development. There is a need to amend definitions and create clear evidentiary requirements to support broad adoption of these new and innovative tools. The biopharma industry, the technology sector, consulting businesses, academic researchers, and regulators need a dialogue via multi-stakeholder collaborations to clarify questions around DHT-derived measures, to unify definitions, and to create the foundations for evidentiary package requirements, providing a path forward to predictable results | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Journal Article | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Review | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Biomarkers |2 NLM | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Demanuele, Charmaine |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a McCarthy, Marie |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Clinical and translational science |d 2008 |g 16(2023), 7 vom: 19. Juli, Seite 1113-1120 |w (DE-627)NLM186388268 |x 1752-8062 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:16 |g year:2023 |g number:7 |g day:19 |g month:07 |g pages:1113-1120 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cts.13529 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NLM | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 16 |j 2023 |e 7 |b 19 |c 07 |h 1113-1120 | ||