Real-world evidence to support regulatory submissions: A landscape review and assessment of use cases

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL
Golnoosh Alipour-Haris, Xinyue Liu, Virginia Acha, Almut G. Winterstein, Mehmet Burcu
{"title":"Real-world evidence to support regulatory submissions: A landscape review and assessment of use cases","authors":"Golnoosh Alipour-Haris,&nbsp;Xinyue Liu,&nbsp;Virginia Acha,&nbsp;Almut G. Winterstein,&nbsp;Mehmet Burcu","doi":"10.1111/cts.13903","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Real-world evidence (RWE) has an increasing role in preapproval settings to support the approval of new medicines and indications. The main objectives of this study were to identify and characterize regulatory use cases that utilized RWE and other related observational approaches through targeted review of publications and regulatory review documents. After screening and inclusion/exclusion, the review characterized 85 regulatory applications with RWE. A total of 31 were in oncology and 54 were in non-oncology therapeutic areas. Most were for indications in adults only (<i>N</i> = 42, 49.4%), while 13 were in pediatrics only (15.3%), and 30 were in both (35.3%). In terms of regulatory context, 59 cases (69.4%) were for an original marketing application, 24 (28.2%) were for label expansion, and 2 (2.4%) were for label modification. Most also received special regulatory designations (e.g., orphan indication, breakthrough therapy, fast track, conditional, and accelerated approvals). There were 42 cases that utilized RWE to support single-arm trials. External data to support single-arm trials were utilized in various ways across use cases, including direct matching, benchmarking, natural history studies as well as literature or previous trials. A variety of data sources were utilized, including electronic health records, claims, registries, site-based charts. Endpoints in oncology use cases commonly included overall survival, progression-free survival. In 13 use cases, RWE was not considered supportive/definitive in regulatory decision-making due to design issues (e.g., small sample size, selection bias, missing data). Overall, RWE is utilized in regulatory approval processes for new indications/label expansion across various therapeutic areas with wide range of approaches. Multifaceted cross-sector efforts are needed to further improve the quality and utility of RWE in regulatory decision-making.</p>","PeriodicalId":50610,"journal":{"name":"Cts-Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"17 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11295294/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cts-Clinical and Translational Science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cts.13903","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Real-world evidence (RWE) has an increasing role in preapproval settings to support the approval of new medicines and indications. The main objectives of this study were to identify and characterize regulatory use cases that utilized RWE and other related observational approaches through targeted review of publications and regulatory review documents. After screening and inclusion/exclusion, the review characterized 85 regulatory applications with RWE. A total of 31 were in oncology and 54 were in non-oncology therapeutic areas. Most were for indications in adults only (N = 42, 49.4%), while 13 were in pediatrics only (15.3%), and 30 were in both (35.3%). In terms of regulatory context, 59 cases (69.4%) were for an original marketing application, 24 (28.2%) were for label expansion, and 2 (2.4%) were for label modification. Most also received special regulatory designations (e.g., orphan indication, breakthrough therapy, fast track, conditional, and accelerated approvals). There were 42 cases that utilized RWE to support single-arm trials. External data to support single-arm trials were utilized in various ways across use cases, including direct matching, benchmarking, natural history studies as well as literature or previous trials. A variety of data sources were utilized, including electronic health records, claims, registries, site-based charts. Endpoints in oncology use cases commonly included overall survival, progression-free survival. In 13 use cases, RWE was not considered supportive/definitive in regulatory decision-making due to design issues (e.g., small sample size, selection bias, missing data). Overall, RWE is utilized in regulatory approval processes for new indications/label expansion across various therapeutic areas with wide range of approaches. Multifaceted cross-sector efforts are needed to further improve the quality and utility of RWE in regulatory decision-making.

支持监管申请的真实证据:使用案例的情况回顾与评估。
真实世界证据(RWE)在支持新药和适应症审批的审批前环境中发挥着越来越重要的作用。本研究的主要目的是通过对出版物和监管审查文件进行有针对性的审查,确定并描述利用真实世界证据和其他相关观察方法的监管用例。经过筛选和纳入/排除后,本次审查确定了 85 个使用 RWE 的监管申请。其中 31 项属于肿瘤治疗领域,54 项属于非肿瘤治疗领域。大部分仅用于成人适应症(42 例,占 49.4%),13 例仅用于儿科(占 15.3%),30 例同时用于成人和儿科(占 35.3%)。就监管背景而言,59 例(69.4%)为原始上市申请,24 例(28.2%)为标签扩展,2 例(2.4%)为标签修改。大多数还获得了特殊监管指定(如孤儿适应症、突破性疗法、快速通道、有条件批准和加速批准)。有 42 例利用 RWE 支持单臂试验。支持单臂试验的外部数据在不同的用例中有不同的使用方式,包括直接匹配、基准、自然史研究以及文献或以前的试验。使用的数据源多种多样,包括电子健康记录、报销单、登记册、基于场地的图表。肿瘤学用例的终点通常包括总生存期和无进展生存期。在 13 个用例中,由于设计问题(如样本量小、选择偏差、数据缺失),RWE 在监管决策中不被认为是支持性/明确性的。总体而言,监管机构在审批新适应症/扩大标签范围的过程中使用了多种方法,涉及多个治疗领域。要进一步提高 RWE 在监管决策中的质量和效用,需要多方面的跨部门努力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Cts-Clinical and Translational Science
Cts-Clinical and Translational Science 医学-医学:研究与实验
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
2.60%
发文量
234
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Clinical and Translational Science (CTS), an official journal of the American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, highlights original translational medicine research that helps bridge laboratory discoveries with the diagnosis and treatment of human disease. Translational medicine is a multi-faceted discipline with a focus on translational therapeutics. In a broad sense, translational medicine bridges across the discovery, development, regulation, and utilization spectrum. Research may appear as Full Articles, Brief Reports, Commentaries, Phase Forwards (clinical trials), Reviews, or Tutorials. CTS also includes invited didactic content that covers the connections between clinical pharmacology and translational medicine. Best-in-class methodologies and best practices are also welcomed as Tutorials. These additional features provide context for research articles and facilitate understanding for a wide array of individuals interested in clinical and translational science. CTS welcomes high quality, scientifically sound, original manuscripts focused on clinical pharmacology and translational science, including animal, in vitro, in silico, and clinical studies supporting the breadth of drug discovery, development, regulation and clinical use of both traditional drugs and innovative modalities.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信