Net clinical benefit of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin in atrial fibrillation: Results from ROCKET AF.

Aims: The aim of this study was to determine the net clinical benefit (NCB) of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation.

Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of 14,236 patients included in ROCKET AF who received at least one dose of study drug. We analyzed NCB using four different methods: (1) composite of death, stroke, systemic embolism, myocardial infarction, and major bleeding; (2) method 1 with fatal or critical organ bleeding substituted for major bleeding; (3) difference between the rate of ischemic stroke or systemic embolism minus 1.

Physician and patient benefit-risk preferences from two randomized long-acting injectable antipsychotic trials.

Purpose: To quantify clinical trial participants' and investigators' judgments with respect to the relative importance of efficacy and safety attributes of antipsychotic treatments for schizophrenia, and to assess the impact of formulation and adherence.

Methods: Discrete-choice experiment surveys were completed by patients with schizophrenia and physician investigators participating in two phase-3 clinical trials of paliperidone palmitate 3-month long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotic. Respondents were asked to choose between hypothetical antipsychotic profiles defined by efficacy, safety, and mode of administration.

Benefit-Risk Evaluation and Decision Making: Some Practical Insights.

Pharmaceutical drugs and devices are increasingly evaluated by quantitative tools that combine benefit and risk. These tools vary by their limitations and desirable properties, which may confuse the decision-making process. Experts from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and industry shared their perspectives at the 2012 American Statistical Association (ASA) Biopharmaceutical Section FDA-Industry Statistics Workshop, and these insights are presented here.

Psychiatrists' judgments about antipsychotic benefit and risk outcomes and formulation in schizophrenia treatment.

Objective: The objectives were to quantify psychiatrists' judgments of the benefits and risks of antipsychotic treatments of patients with schizophrenia and to evaluate how patient adherence history affects these judgments.

Methods: Weights assigned by respondents to risks, benefits, and alternative drug formulations in the treatment of schizophrenia were assessed via a Web-based survey by using a discrete-choice experiment. Respondents in the United States and the United Kingdom chose among alternative scenarios characterized by various levels of improvement in positive symptoms, negative symptoms, social functioning, weight gain, extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS), hyperprolactinemia, and hyperglycemia and by formulation.