Comparison of treatment efficacy of targeted therapies approved in China for non-small cell lung cancer before and after the introduction of accelerated drug marketing registration procedures.

IF 3.2 4区 医学 Q2 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Chenning Liu, Liyang Lyu, Yufan Zhang, Yingyi Tian, Jing Yuan, Chihua Li, Yuanjia Hu
{"title":"Comparison of treatment efficacy of targeted therapies approved in China for non-small cell lung cancer before and after the introduction of accelerated drug marketing registration procedures.","authors":"Chenning Liu, Liyang Lyu, Yufan Zhang, Yingyi Tian, Jing Yuan, Chihua Li, Yuanjia Hu","doi":"10.1007/s11096-026-02119-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The introduction of Accelerated Drug Marketing Registration Procedures (ADMRPs) in China has improved patient access to innovative therapies, but concerns remain about the robustness and consistency of efficacy evidence.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>This study aimed to compare the treatment efficacy of approved targeted therapies for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) before and after the implementation of ADMRPs.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>In this retrospective study, we analyzed targeted therapies for NSCLC approved in China as of December 31, 2024. Approvals were categorized as pre-policy or post-policy groups based on the July 1, 2020 implementation of ADMRPs. Descriptive statistics were used to examine approved indications and pivotal trial designs. Meta-analysis and meta-regression compared pre-approval efficacy outcomes, including overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), disease-free survival, and objective response rate (ORR), between groups. Sensitivity analyses evaluated post-marketing OS data and the robustness of results.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 59 indications supported by 72 trials were approved. Post-policy approvals increased markedly (41 vs 18), with rises in domestic drugs (16.7% pre-policy vs 61.0% post-policy) and uncommon targets (5.6% pre-policy vs 43.9% post-policy) (both P < 0.05). Pivotal trials shifted from primarily Phase III-IV randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (76.0%) pre-policy to Phase I-II single-arm designs (68.1%) post-policy, mainly supporting drugs for uncommon or resistance mutations, whereas approvals for classical targets remained predominantly based on RCTs (90.0% pre-policy vs 93.8% post-policy; P = 0.416). Meta-analyses found no significant differences in pre-approval efficacy between groups for PFS (HR: 0.52 [0.45-0.61] vs 0.44 [0.36-0.54]; P = 0.206) or ORR (0.63 [0.55-0.70] vs 0.65 [0.59-0.70]; P = 0.705). However, OS meta-analysis was only feasible in the pre-policy group, whereas OS data in the post-policy group remained immature, with a median follow-up of 17 months (IQR 8-34) after approval.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>After the introduction of ADMRPs, approvals of targeted therapies for NSCLC increased substantially, without significant loss of pre-approval treatment efficacy. However, due to the limited follow-up, definitive survival benefits for the post-policy group cannot yet be established. The increased reliance on single-arm trials underscores the necessity of rigorous confirmatory post-marketing studies.</p>","PeriodicalId":13828,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy","volume":" ","pages":"1412-1423"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13369530/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-026-02119-x","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/3/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: The introduction of Accelerated Drug Marketing Registration Procedures (ADMRPs) in China has improved patient access to innovative therapies, but concerns remain about the robustness and consistency of efficacy evidence.

Aim: This study aimed to compare the treatment efficacy of approved targeted therapies for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) before and after the implementation of ADMRPs.

Method: In this retrospective study, we analyzed targeted therapies for NSCLC approved in China as of December 31, 2024. Approvals were categorized as pre-policy or post-policy groups based on the July 1, 2020 implementation of ADMRPs. Descriptive statistics were used to examine approved indications and pivotal trial designs. Meta-analysis and meta-regression compared pre-approval efficacy outcomes, including overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), disease-free survival, and objective response rate (ORR), between groups. Sensitivity analyses evaluated post-marketing OS data and the robustness of results.

Results: A total of 59 indications supported by 72 trials were approved. Post-policy approvals increased markedly (41 vs 18), with rises in domestic drugs (16.7% pre-policy vs 61.0% post-policy) and uncommon targets (5.6% pre-policy vs 43.9% post-policy) (both P < 0.05). Pivotal trials shifted from primarily Phase III-IV randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (76.0%) pre-policy to Phase I-II single-arm designs (68.1%) post-policy, mainly supporting drugs for uncommon or resistance mutations, whereas approvals for classical targets remained predominantly based on RCTs (90.0% pre-policy vs 93.8% post-policy; P = 0.416). Meta-analyses found no significant differences in pre-approval efficacy between groups for PFS (HR: 0.52 [0.45-0.61] vs 0.44 [0.36-0.54]; P = 0.206) or ORR (0.63 [0.55-0.70] vs 0.65 [0.59-0.70]; P = 0.705). However, OS meta-analysis was only feasible in the pre-policy group, whereas OS data in the post-policy group remained immature, with a median follow-up of 17 months (IQR 8-34) after approval.

Conclusion: After the introduction of ADMRPs, approvals of targeted therapies for NSCLC increased substantially, without significant loss of pre-approval treatment efficacy. However, due to the limited follow-up, definitive survival benefits for the post-policy group cannot yet be established. The increased reliance on single-arm trials underscores the necessity of rigorous confirmatory post-marketing studies.

引入加速药品上市注册程序前后,中国批准的非小细胞肺癌靶向治疗的疗效比较
导论:中国药品上市加速注册程序(ADMRPs)的引入改善了患者对创新疗法的可及性,但对疗效证据的稳健性和一致性仍存在担忧。目的:本研究旨在比较ADMRPs实施前后经批准的非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)靶向治疗的疗效。方法:在这项回顾性研究中,我们分析了截至2024年12月31日在中国批准的非小细胞肺癌靶向治疗。根据2020年7月1日实施的admrp,批准被分类为政策前或政策后组。描述性统计用于检查已批准的适应症和关键试验设计。meta分析和meta回归比较了两组间批准前的疗效结果,包括总生存期(OS)、无进展生存期(PFS)、无病生存期和客观缓解率(ORR)。敏感性分析评估上市后OS数据和结果的稳健性。结果:共有72项试验支持的59个适应症获得批准。政策后的批准数量显著增加(41对18),其中国产药物的批准数量增加(政策前为16.7%,政策后为61.0%),而非常见靶点的批准数量增加(政策前为5.6%,政策后为43.9%)(均为P结论:引入ADMRPs后,非小细胞肺癌靶向治疗的批准数量大幅增加,但未显着丧失批准前的治疗效果。然而,由于随访有限,尚不能确定政策后群体的确切生存效益。对单臂试验的日益依赖强调了严格的确证性上市后研究的必要性。
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
4.10
自引率
8.30%
发文量
131
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy (IJCP) offers a platform for articles on research in Clinical Pharmacy, Pharmaceutical Care and related practice-oriented subjects in the pharmaceutical sciences. IJCP is a bi-monthly, international, peer-reviewed journal that publishes original research data, new ideas and discussions on pharmacotherapy and outcome research, clinical pharmacy, pharmacoepidemiology, pharmacoeconomics, the clinical use of medicines, medical devices and laboratory tests, information on medicines and medical devices information, pharmacy services research, medication management, other clinical aspects of pharmacy. IJCP publishes original Research articles, Review articles , Short research reports, Commentaries, book reviews, and Letters to the Editor. International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy is affiliated with the European Society of Clinical Pharmacy (ESCP). ESCP promotes practice and research in Clinical Pharmacy, especially in Europe. The general aim of the society is to advance education, practice and research in Clinical Pharmacy . Until 2010 the journal was called Pharmacy World & Science.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书