Evidence mapPaperPMID 37020160Full record

ArticleTherapeutic innovation & regulatory science2023

From Meaningful Outcomes to Meaningful Change Thresholds: A Path to Progress for Establishing Digital Endpoints.

Marie Mc Carthy, Kate Burrows, Pip Griffiths, Peter M Black, Charmaine Demanuele, Niklas Karlsson, Joan Buenconsejo, Nikunj Patel, Wen-Hung Chen, Joseph C Cappelleri

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 6 institutions in 4 countries.

Marie Mc CarthyNovartis Ireland Ltd, Dublin, D04A9N6, Co Dublin, Ireland. marie-1.mccarthy@novartis.com.ORCID 0000-0003-2730-0233
Kate BurrowsBurrows Consulting, London, UK.
Pip GriffithsIQVIA France, Courbevoie, France.
Peter M BlackPMB Consulting, Austin, TX, USA.
Charmaine DemanuelePfizer Inc, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Niklas KarlssonAstraZeneca, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Joan BuenconsejoAstraZeneca, Gaithersburg, MD, USA.
Nikunj PatelAstraZeneca, Gaithersburg, MD, USA.
Wen-Hung ChenGlaxoSmithKline, Collegeville, PA, USA.
Joseph C CappelleriPfizer Inc, Groton, CT, USA.
AstraZeneca (United States) · USPfizer (United States) · USAstraZeneca (Sweden) · SEGlaxoSmithKline (United States) · USIQVIA (France) · FRNovartis (Ireland) · IE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This paper examines the use of digital endpoints (DEs) derived from digital health technologies (DHTs), focusing primarily on the specific considerations regarding the determination of meaningful change thresholds (MCT). Using DHTs in drug development is becoming more commonplace. There is general acceptance of the value of DHTs supporting patient-centric trial design, capturing data outside the traditional clinical trial setting, and generating DEs with the potential to be more sensitive to change than conventional assessments. However, the transition from exploratory endpoints to primary and secondary endpoints capable of supporting labeling claims requires these endpoints to be substantive with reproducible population-specific values. Meaningful change represents the amount of change in an endpoint measure perceived as important to patients and should be determined for each digital endpoint and given population under consideration. This paper examines existing approaches to determine meaningful change thresholds and explores examples of these methodologies and their use as part of DE development: emphasizing the importance of determining what aspects of health are important to patients and ensuring the DE captures these concepts of interest and aligns with the overarching endpoint strategy. Examples are drawn from published DE qualification documentation and responses to qualification submissions under review by the various regulatory authorities. It is the hope that these insights will inform and strengthen the development and validation of DEs as drug development tools, particularly for those new to the approaches to determine MCTs.

Indexed as

Drug DevelopmentProduct LabelingHumansClinical outcome assessmentsClinical trialsDigital endpointsDigital health technologiesDrug Development ToolsMeaningful changeValidation

Identifiers

PMID37020160
OpenAlexW4362604322

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.