Repurposing Registries: Completeness of Real-World Data for Regulatory and HTA Purposes in Three Cancer-Focused Registries

IF 4.9 2区 医学 Q1 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics Pub Date : 2026-09-11 Epub Date: 2026-06-23 DOI:10.1002/cpt.70368
Manon C. Wilpshaar, Doranne Hilarius, Luisa Prada, Ansgar Weltermann, Christine Leopold
{"title":"Repurposing Registries: Completeness of Real-World Data for Regulatory and HTA Purposes in Three Cancer-Focused Registries","authors":"Manon C. Wilpshaar,&nbsp;Doranne Hilarius,&nbsp;Luisa Prada,&nbsp;Ansgar Weltermann,&nbsp;Christine Leopold","doi":"10.1002/cpt.70368","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Despite developments in supporting the identification and selection of fit-for-purpose registries, a translational gap remains between the original purposes of clinically focused registries and their current and future expected use in policymaking. This study aimed to assess the extent to which cancer-focused registries collect essential data elements for regulatory and Health Technology Assessment (HTA) processes. Using literature and expert input, a reference dataset of essential data elements was developed. Completeness of data elements in this reference dataset was evaluated on the example of three European, cancer-focused registries, varying in type, coverage, and health system: the Cancer Centre Upper Austria (CCUA) registry, the Dutch Medication Audit (DMA), and the Portuguese Oncology Institute of Porto (RIC IPO Porto) registry. The evaluated registries exhibit clear differences in inclusion criteria driven by their specific aims. Data elements related to comorbidities, concomitant therapies, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), resource use, and safety outcomes were lacking partly or completely in all evaluated registries, highlighting the importance of developing disease-specific core datasets to which registry holders can benchmark their data collection. This study also highlights that the initial aims and design of registries impact their strengths and weaknesses in supporting regulatory and HTA decision-making. Optimally repurposing registry data requires capacity building for registry holders and regulatory/HTA stakeholders focusing on mutual understanding of aims, needs, and limitations. Additional research should address data interoperability, standardization, and data quality across registries.</p>","PeriodicalId":153,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics","volume":"120 4","pages":"943-954"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13339414/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cpt.70368","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/6/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Despite developments in supporting the identification and selection of fit-for-purpose registries, a translational gap remains between the original purposes of clinically focused registries and their current and future expected use in policymaking. This study aimed to assess the extent to which cancer-focused registries collect essential data elements for regulatory and Health Technology Assessment (HTA) processes. Using literature and expert input, a reference dataset of essential data elements was developed. Completeness of data elements in this reference dataset was evaluated on the example of three European, cancer-focused registries, varying in type, coverage, and health system: the Cancer Centre Upper Austria (CCUA) registry, the Dutch Medication Audit (DMA), and the Portuguese Oncology Institute of Porto (RIC IPO Porto) registry. The evaluated registries exhibit clear differences in inclusion criteria driven by their specific aims. Data elements related to comorbidities, concomitant therapies, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), resource use, and safety outcomes were lacking partly or completely in all evaluated registries, highlighting the importance of developing disease-specific core datasets to which registry holders can benchmark their data collection. This study also highlights that the initial aims and design of registries impact their strengths and weaknesses in supporting regulatory and HTA decision-making. Optimally repurposing registry data requires capacity building for registry holders and regulatory/HTA stakeholders focusing on mutual understanding of aims, needs, and limitations. Additional research should address data interoperability, standardization, and data quality across registries.

重新利用注册表:三个以癌症为重点的注册表中用于监管和HTA目的的真实数据的完整性。
尽管在支持识别和选择适合目的的注册表方面取得了进展,但临床重点注册表的原始目的与它们在政策制定中的当前和未来预期用途之间的翻译差距仍然存在。本研究旨在评估以癌症为重点的登记处为监管和卫生技术评估(HTA)过程收集基本数据元素的程度。利用文献和专家的意见,开发了一个基本数据元素的参考数据集。本参考数据集中数据元素的完整性以三个欧洲癌症注册中心为例进行评估,这些注册中心的类型、覆盖范围和卫生系统各不相同:上奥地利癌症中心(CCUA)注册中心、荷兰药物审计(DMA)和葡萄牙波尔图肿瘤研究所(RIC IPO波尔图)注册中心。被评估的注册中心在其特定目标驱动的纳入标准上表现出明显的差异。与合并症、伴随治疗、患者报告结果测量(PROMs)、资源使用和安全性结果相关的数据元素在所有评估的登记中都部分或完全缺乏,这突出了开发特定疾病核心数据集的重要性,登记持有人可以以此为基准进行数据收集。本研究还强调,登记处的初始目标和设计会影响其在支持监管和HTA决策方面的优势和劣势。以最佳方式重新利用注册管理机构数据需要对注册管理机构持有人和监管/HTA利益相关者进行能力建设,重点是相互理解目标、需求和限制。额外的研究应该解决跨注册中心的数据互操作性、标准化和数据质量问题。
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
12.70
自引率
7.50%
发文量
290
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics (CPT) is the authoritative cross-disciplinary journal in experimental and clinical medicine devoted to publishing advances in the nature, action, efficacy, and evaluation of therapeutics. CPT welcomes original Articles in the emerging areas of translational, predictive and personalized medicine; new therapeutic modalities including gene and cell therapies; pharmacogenomics, proteomics and metabolomics; bioinformation and applied systems biology complementing areas of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, human investigation and clinical trials, pharmacovigilence, pharmacoepidemiology, pharmacometrics, and population pharmacology.
×
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