Performance of the accelerated assessment of the European Medicines Agency.

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q2 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Vittorio Del Grosso, Martina Perini, Giorgio Casilli, Enrico Costa, Valentina Boscaro, Gianluca Miglio, Armando A Genazzani
{"title":"Performance of the accelerated assessment of the European Medicines Agency.","authors":"Vittorio Del Grosso, Martina Perini, Giorgio Casilli, Enrico Costa, Valentina Boscaro, Gianluca Miglio, Armando A Genazzani","doi":"10.1111/bcp.16385","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>In Europe, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) has an accelerated pathway to prioritize approval of medicines. Approved drugs are then assessed by Health Technology Assessment (HTA) bodies before being made available to patients. The aim of the study was to evaluate the characteristics of the drugs admitted to the EMA accelerated assessment (AA) and scrutinize the downstream HTA procedures regarding these medicines and the final assessment regarding added therapeutic value (ATV).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Regulatory publicly available documents were scrutinized for all medicines authorized by the EMA between 2019 and 2021 to create a regulatory database. A second database was created by extracting data of the medicines that had requested the EMA accelerated pathway from three national HTA bodies (AIFA, HAS and G-BA).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Standard assessments by the EMA had a median of 364 days while AAs were significantly shorter (189 days). Only 12 out of 164 authorized medicines were assessed in this manner. Small chemical entities had a significantly lower chance of being assessed under the AA, while biological and PRIME scheme medicines had a higher chance; AA had a higher chance of leading to authorizations under exceptional circumstances. These 12 products were assessed more quickly compared to other products by HTA bodies, although this did not always lead to decisions of major ATV over alternatives.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A minority of medicinal products are assessed under the accelerated pathway. HTA bodies also assess these products more quickly, but do not always perceive an important clinical advantage over alternatives.</p>","PeriodicalId":9251,"journal":{"name":"British journal of clinical pharmacology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British journal of clinical pharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/bcp.16385","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aims: In Europe, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) has an accelerated pathway to prioritize approval of medicines. Approved drugs are then assessed by Health Technology Assessment (HTA) bodies before being made available to patients. The aim of the study was to evaluate the characteristics of the drugs admitted to the EMA accelerated assessment (AA) and scrutinize the downstream HTA procedures regarding these medicines and the final assessment regarding added therapeutic value (ATV).

Methods: Regulatory publicly available documents were scrutinized for all medicines authorized by the EMA between 2019 and 2021 to create a regulatory database. A second database was created by extracting data of the medicines that had requested the EMA accelerated pathway from three national HTA bodies (AIFA, HAS and G-BA).

Results: Standard assessments by the EMA had a median of 364 days while AAs were significantly shorter (189 days). Only 12 out of 164 authorized medicines were assessed in this manner. Small chemical entities had a significantly lower chance of being assessed under the AA, while biological and PRIME scheme medicines had a higher chance; AA had a higher chance of leading to authorizations under exceptional circumstances. These 12 products were assessed more quickly compared to other products by HTA bodies, although this did not always lead to decisions of major ATV over alternatives.

Conclusions: A minority of medicinal products are assessed under the accelerated pathway. HTA bodies also assess these products more quickly, but do not always perceive an important clinical advantage over alternatives.

欧洲药品管理局加速评估的执行情况。
目的:在欧洲,欧洲药品管理局(EMA)有一个加速的途径来优先批准药物。批准的药物在提供给患者之前,由卫生技术评估机构进行评估。该研究的目的是评估进入EMA加速评估(AA)的药物的特征,并审查这些药物的下游HTA程序以及关于附加治疗价值(ATV)的最终评估。方法:审查EMA在2019年至2021年期间批准的所有药物的公开监管文件,以创建监管数据库。第二个数据库是通过从三个国家级HTA机构(AIFA、HAS和G-BA)提取申请EMA加速通路的药物数据而创建的。结果:EMA标准评估的中位数为364天,而aa评估的中位数明显缩短(189天)。164种获批药物中只有12种以这种方式进行了评估。小型化学实体在AA方案下被评估的机会明显较低,而生物和PRIME方案药物的机会较高;AA在特殊情况下获得授权的几率更高。与其他产品相比,HTA机构对这12种产品的评估速度更快,尽管这并不总是导致主要ATV对替代品的决定。结论:少数药品采用加速途径进行评价。HTA机构也能更快地评估这些产品,但并不总是认为它们比替代产品有重要的临床优势。
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
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
8.80%
发文量
419
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Published on behalf of the British Pharmacological Society, the British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology features papers and reports on all aspects of drug action in humans: review articles, mini review articles, original papers, commentaries, editorials and letters. The Journal enjoys a wide readership, bridging the gap between the medical profession, clinical research and the pharmaceutical industry. It also publishes research on new methods, new drugs and new approaches to treatment. The Journal is recognised as one of the leading publications in its field. It is online only, publishes open access research through its OnlineOpen programme and is published monthly.
×
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