期刊文献+

生命质量调整的无症状或不良反应时间方法及其应用介绍

Introduction of Quality Adjusted Time without Symptoms or Toxicity Method and Its Application
原文传递
导出
摘要 质量调整生存分析方法是将生命质量和生存时间两个测量指标整合为单个测量指标的综合疗效评价方法,包括质量调整生命年(QALYs)和生命质量调整的无症状或不良反应时间(Q-TWiST)等方法。QALYs常用于卫生经济学中且已被国内外学者所认可,Q-TWiST常用于治疗肿瘤药物疗效评估,在国外得到较为广泛应用,但国内应用甚少。鉴于目前国内缺乏对该方法的系统介绍,本研究将对Q-TWiST方法及其应用进行梳理,以期为国内肿瘤领域全面评估药物疗效提供相关参考与借鉴。 The quality-adjusted survival analysis method is a comprehensive efficacy evaluation method that integrates the 2 latitude measurement indicators of quality of life and survival time,including quality-adjusted life years(QALYs)and quality adjusted time without symptoms or toxicity(Q-TWiST)and other methods.QALYs are commonly used in health economy and have been recognized by scholars at home and abroad.Q-TWiST is often used to evaluate the efficacy of tumor drugs.It is widely used abroad,but it is rarely used domestically.In view of the current lack of systematic introduction of this method in China,this article systematically summarized Q-TWiST method and its application,so as to provide references for the comprehensive evaluation of drug efficacy in the domestic tumor field.
作者 司燕会 李林 李顺平 SI Yan-Hui;LI Lin;LI Shun-Ping(School of Medical and Health Management,Cheeloo College of Medicine,Shandong University,Key Laboratory of Health Economics and Policy Research of National Health Commission(Shandong University),Jinan 250012,China;Institute of Hospital Management,Chinese People's Liberation Army General Hospital,Beijing 100853,China)
出处 《中国药物经济学》 2020年第12期18-21,共4页 China Journal of Pharmaceutical Economics
关键词 生命质量调整的无症状或不良反应时间 生命质量 评估方法 Quality adjusted time without symptoms or toxicity Quality of life Evaluation method
  • 相关文献

参考文献2

二级参考文献47

  • 1张丕德,郜艳辉,李丽霞,周舒东,李燕芬.将COX模型嵌入Markov链进行调整的生存质量分析[J].广东药学院学报,2007,23(3):318-320. 被引量:3
  • 2Haramburu F, Pouyanne P, Imbs JL. Incidence and preva- lence of adverse drug reaction [ J ]. Presse Med, 2000, 29 (2) :111-114.
  • 3Medicine Io. Crossing the quality chasm: a new health sys- tem for the 21st century [ M]. Washington DC: National a-cademy press, 2001.23-38.
  • 4Johnson JA, Bootman JL. A cost-of-illness model [ J]. Arch Intern Med, 1995,155(18) :1949-1956.
  • 5Walker S, McAuslane N, Liberti L. Developing a common benefit-risk assessment methodology for medicines- a pro- gress report[EB/OL], http://www, scripregulatoryaffairs. com. 2011/2012.
  • 6EMA. Benefit-risk methodology project [ EB/OL]. http:// www. ema. europa, eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Report/ 2011/07/WC500109477. pdf. 2009/2012.
  • 7Guo JJ, Pandey S, Bian B, et al. A review of quantitative risk-benefit methodologies for assessing drug safety and effi- cacy - report of the ISPOR risk-benefit management working group [ J ]. Value Health, 2010,13 ( 5 ) :657-666.
  • 8Felli JC, Noel RA. A Muhiattribute model for evaluating the benefit-risk profiles of treatment alternatives [ J]. Med Decis Making, 2009,29 : 104-115.
  • 9Ferrari MD, Goadsby PJ. The use of muhiattribute decision models in evaluating triptan treatment options in migraine [J]. J Neurol, 2005,252:1026-1032.
  • 10Mussen F, Salek S, Walker S. A quantitative approach to benefit-risk assessment of medicines-part 1: the develop- ment of a new model using multi-criteria decision analysis; part 2 : the practical application of a new model [ J ]. Phar- macoepidemiol Drug Saf , 2007,16 : s42-46.

共引文献8

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部