Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2022 Jun 2;6(1):57.
doi: 10.1186/s41687-022-00466-7.

Systematic review of guidance for the collection and use of patient-reported outcomes in real-world evidence generation to support regulation, reimbursement and health policy

Konrad Maruszczyk  1   2 , Olalekan Lee Aiyegbusi  1   2   3   4   5 , Barbara Torlinska  1   2   3 , Philip Collis  1   5 , Thomas Keeley  1   6 , Melanie J Calvert  7   8   9   10   11
Affiliations
Review

Systematic review of guidance for the collection and use of patient-reported outcomes in real-world evidence generation to support regulation, reimbursement and health policy

Konrad Maruszczyk et al. J Patient Rep Outcomes. .

Abstract

Background: Real-world evidence (RWE) plays an increasingly important role within global regulatory and reimbursement processes. RWE generation can be enhanced by the collection and use of patient-reported outcomes (PROs), which can provide valuable information on the effectiveness, safety, and tolerability of health interventions from the patient perspective. This systematic review aims to examine and summarise the available PRO-specific recommendations and guidance for RWE generation.

Methods and findings: Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online, Excerpta Medica Database, and websites of selected organisations were systematically searched to identify relevant publications. 1,249 articles were screened of which 7 papers met the eligibility criteria and were included in the review. The included publications provided PRO-specific recommendations to facilitate the use of PROs for RWE generation and these were extracted and grouped into eight major categories. These included: (1) instrument selection, (2) participation and engagement, (3) burden to health care professionals and patients, (4) stakeholder collaboration, (5) education and training, (6) PRO implementation process, (7) data collection and management, and (8) data analysis and presentation of results. The main limitation of the study was the potential exclusion of relevant publications, due to poor indexing of the databases and websites searched.

Conclusions: PROs may provide valuable and crucial patient input in RWE generation. Whilst valuable insights can be gained from guidance for use of PROs in clinical care, there is a lack of international guidance specific to RWE generation in the context of use for regulatory decision-making, reimbursement, and health policy. Clear and appropriate evidence-based guidance is required to maximise the potential benefits of implementing PROs for RWE generation. Unique aspects between PRO guidance for clinical care and other purposes should be differentiated. The needs of various stakeholder groups (including patients, health care professionals, regulators, payers, and industry) should be considered when developing future guidelines.

Keywords: Guidelines; PRO; Patient-reported outcomes; RWE; Real-world evidence; Recommendations.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

MC is Director of the Birmingham Health Partners Centre for Regulatory Science and Innovation, Director of the Centre for Patient-Reported Outcomes Research and is a National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Senior Investigator. She receives funding from the NIHR Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre, the NIHR Surgical Reconstruction and Microbiology Research Centre and NIHR ARC West Midlands at the at the University of Birmingham and University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Health Data Research UK, Innovate UK (part of UK Research and Innovation), Macmillan Cancer Support, UCB and GSK. MC has received personal fees from Astellas, Takeda, Merck, Daiichi Sankyo, Glaukos, CIS Oncology, Aparito Ltd, GSK, Genentech and the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) outside the submitted work. OLA receives funding from the NIHR Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre (BRC), NIHR Applied Research Collaboration (ARC) West Midlands at the University of Birmingham and University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation, Innovate UK (part of UK Research and Innovation), Gilead Sciences Ltd, and Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc. OLA declares personal fees from Gilead Sciences Ltd, GSK and Merck outside the submitted work. TK is an employee and shareholder of GSK Ltd. KM is the holder of the GSK PhD grant. Other authors declare no competing interests. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR, or the Department of Health and Social Care.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
PRISMA flow diagram
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. FDA (2021) FDA Real-world evidence. https://www.fda.gov/science-research/science-and-research-special-topics.... Accessed 05 Mar 2021
    1. Kluetz PG, O'Connor DJ, Soltys K. Incorporating the patient experience into regulatory decision making in the USA, Europe, and Canada. Lancet Oncol. 2018;19(5):e267–e274. doi: 10.1016/s1470-2045(18)30097-4. - DOI - PubMed
    1. FDA (2021) FDA patient-focused drug development guidance series for enhancing the incorporation of the patient’s voice in medical product development and regulatory decision making. https://www.fda.gov/drugs/development-approval-process-drugs/fda-patient.... Accessed 15 Feb 2022
    1. MHRA (2021) Innovative licensing and access pathway. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/innovative-licensing-and-access-pathway. Accessed 15 Feb 2022
    1. European Medicines Agency (2016) Appendix 2 to the guideline on the evaluation of anticancer medicinal products in man: the use of patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures in oncology studies. Available at: https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/other/appendix-2-guideline-evalua...

LinkOut - more resources