Abstract:Adverse events suffer from poor reporting within randomised controlled trials, despite them being crucial to the evaluation of a treatment. A recent update to the CONSORT harms checklist aims to improve reporting by providing structure and consistency to the information presented. We propose an extension wherein harms would be reported in conjunction with effectiveness outcome(s) rather than in silo to provide a more complete picture of the evidence acquired within a trial. Benefit-risk methods are designed to simultaneously consider both benefits and risks, and therefore, we believe these methods could be implemented to improve the prominence of adverse events when reporting trials. The aim of this article is to use case studies to demonstrate the practical utility of benefit-risk methods to present adverse events results alongside effectiveness results. Two randomised controlled trials have been selected as case studies, the Option-DM trial and the SANAD II trial. Using a previous review, a shortlist of 17 benefit-risk methods which could potentially be used for reporting RCTs was created. From this shortlist, three benefit-risk methods are applied across the two case studies. We selected these methods for their usefulness to achieve the aim of this paper and which are commonly used in the literature. The methods selected were the Benefit-Risk Action Team (BRAT) Framework, net clinical benefit (NCB), and the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) 3 × 3 table. Results using the benefit-risk method added further context and detail to the clinical summaries made from the trials. In the case of the SANAD II trial, the clinicians concluded that despite the primary outcome being improved by the treatment, the increase in adverse events negated the improvement and the treatment was therefore not recommended. The benefit-risk methods applied to this case study outlined the data that this decision was based on in a clear and transparent way. Using benefit-risk methods to report the results of trials can increase the prominence of adverse event results by presenting them alongside the primary efficacy/effectiveness outcomes. This ensures that all the factors which would be used to determine whether a treatment would be recommended are transparent to the reader.

Evidence-Based Risk Management: How Can We Succeed?: Deliberations from a Risk Management Advisory Council

Advancing the Field of Pharmaceutical Risk Minimization Through Application of Implementation Science Best Practices

The use of mechanistic evidence in drug approval

Advancing structured decision‐making in drug regulation at the FDA and EMA

Funding the unfundable: mechanisms for managing uncertainty in decisions on the introduction of new and innovative technologies into healthcare systems

Examining the Use of Real‐World Evidence in the Regulatory Process

Post-approval evidence generation: a shared responsibility for healthcare

100 Evidence for decision making throughout the product life-span

Investigating the Benefit-Risk Profile of Drugs: From Spontaneous Reporting Systems to Real-World Data for Pharmacovigilance

Generating Evidence from Expanded Access Use of Rare Disease Medicines: Challenges and Recommendations

Use of Real-World Evidence for Regulatory Approval and Coverage of Medical Devices: A Landscape Assessment

Comprehensive Assessment of Risk-Based Quality Management Adoption in Clinical Trials

Use of real‐world evidence in regulatory decisions for rare diseases in the United States—Current status and future directions

Clinical Risk Management in Mental Health Services: 10 Principles for Best Practice

A proposal for using benefit-risk methods to improve the prominence of adverse event results when reporting trials

Putting meat on the bone: how to fast-track innovative medicines to those who need them and generate data to justify continued use

Advancing the Real-World Evidence for Medical Devices through Coordinated Registry Networks

Assessing the benefit-risk balance of drugs. Some lessons from the COVID pandemic

Regulatory perspectives on post-market evidence generation schemes for high-risk medical devices: a systematic review

Assessing clinical benefit in the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program: A 2-step approach for improving transparency, consistency, and meaningful patient engagement

Improved clinical investigation and evaluation of high-risk medical devices: the rationale and objectives of CORE–MD (Coordinating Research and Evidence for Medical Devices)