英国早期获得药物计划10年:使用公开数据的评估。

JRSM Open Pub Date : 2025-02-24 eCollection Date: 2025-02-01 DOI:10.1177/20542704251317916
Pandora Pound, Rebecca Ram, Kathy Archibald
{"title":"英国早期获得药物计划10年:使用公开数据的评估。","authors":"Pandora Pound, Rebecca Ram, Kathy Archibald","doi":"10.1177/20542704251317916","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To investigate the drugs and indications that have passed through the UK's Early Access to Medicines Scheme (EAMS) to date, the type of evidence the regulator considers when accepting a drug into the EAMS, and potential risks to patients.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Analysis of publicly available data: MHRA Public Assessment Reports; Electronic Medicines Compendium database; interactive Drug Analysis Profiles database; Eudravigilance database.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>United Kingdom.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>The 51 'scientific opinions' available on the MHRA website in June 2024.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Public Assessment Reports, pharmacovigilance data.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>After exclusions, there were 48 EAMS submissions, consisting of 48 indications and 32 drugs. 60% of indications were for cancer. Only 7% of EAMS submissions were based on double-blind, placebo-controlled randomised trials. The average sample size of studies conducted for the EAMS was 654. Most studies used surrogate (76%) and/or survival (57%) outcomes. Only 17% used subjective outcomes. For 17% of the indications, no ongoing studies were being conducted. Animal studies were conducted preclinically for all drugs and 35% also conducted in vitro studies. 47% of the drugs had elevated rates of suspected adverse reaction reports according to pharmacovigilance data.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We recommend that the EAMS drugs with elevated reporting rates are reviewed, that future studies of EAMS drugs use patient-centred outcomes, that preclinical studies make greater use of human biology-based approaches, that post-approval trials are conducted, and that future reviews of the EAMS centre the experience of patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":17674,"journal":{"name":"JRSM Open","volume":"16 2","pages":"20542704251317916"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11848878/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The UK's Early Access to Medicines Scheme 10 years on: an evaluation using publicly available data.\",\"authors\":\"Pandora Pound, Rebecca Ram, Kathy Archibald\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/20542704251317916\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To investigate the drugs and indications that have passed through the UK's Early Access to Medicines Scheme (EAMS) to date, the type of evidence the regulator considers when accepting a drug into the EAMS, and potential risks to patients.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Analysis of publicly available data: MHRA Public Assessment Reports; Electronic Medicines Compendium database; interactive Drug Analysis Profiles database; Eudravigilance database.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>United Kingdom.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>The 51 'scientific opinions' available on the MHRA website in June 2024.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Public Assessment Reports, pharmacovigilance data.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>After exclusions, there were 48 EAMS submissions, consisting of 48 indications and 32 drugs. 60% of indications were for cancer. Only 7% of EAMS submissions were based on double-blind, placebo-controlled randomised trials. The average sample size of studies conducted for the EAMS was 654. Most studies used surrogate (76%) and/or survival (57%) outcomes. Only 17% used subjective outcomes. For 17% of the indications, no ongoing studies were being conducted. Animal studies were conducted preclinically for all drugs and 35% also conducted in vitro studies. 47% of the drugs had elevated rates of suspected adverse reaction reports according to pharmacovigilance data.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We recommend that the EAMS drugs with elevated reporting rates are reviewed, that future studies of EAMS drugs use patient-centred outcomes, that preclinical studies make greater use of human biology-based approaches, that post-approval trials are conducted, and that future reviews of the EAMS centre the experience of patients.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17674,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JRSM Open\",\"volume\":\"16 2\",\"pages\":\"20542704251317916\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11848878/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JRSM Open\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/20542704251317916\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/2/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JRSM Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20542704251317916","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:调查迄今为止通过英国早期药物准入计划(EAMS)的药物和适应症,监管机构在接受药物进入EAMS时考虑的证据类型,以及对患者的潜在风险。设计:公开数据分析:MHRA公共评估报告;电子医药纲要数据库;交互式药物分析档案数据库;Eudravigilance数据库。背景:英国。参与者:2024年6月MHRA网站上的51个“科学意见”。主要评价指标:公共评估报告、药物警戒数据。结果:经排除后,共有48份EAMS申报,包括48个适应症和32种药物。60%的适应症是癌症。只有7%的EAMS申请是基于双盲、安慰剂对照的随机试验。为EAMS进行的研究的平均样本量为654。大多数研究使用替代(76%)和/或生存(57%)结局。只有17%的人使用了主观结果。对于17%的适应症,没有正在进行的研究。所有药物均在临床前进行了动物实验,35%的药物还进行了体外实验。根据药物警戒数据,47%的药物有较高的疑似不良反应报告率。结论:我们建议对报告率较高的EAMS药物进行审查,EAMS药物的未来研究使用以患者为中心的结果,临床前研究更多地使用基于人类生物学的方法,进行批准后试验,未来的EAMS审查以患者的经验为中心。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The UK's Early Access to Medicines Scheme 10 years on: an evaluation using publicly available data.

Objectives: To investigate the drugs and indications that have passed through the UK's Early Access to Medicines Scheme (EAMS) to date, the type of evidence the regulator considers when accepting a drug into the EAMS, and potential risks to patients.

Design: Analysis of publicly available data: MHRA Public Assessment Reports; Electronic Medicines Compendium database; interactive Drug Analysis Profiles database; Eudravigilance database.

Setting: United Kingdom.

Participants: The 51 'scientific opinions' available on the MHRA website in June 2024.

Main outcome measures: Public Assessment Reports, pharmacovigilance data.

Results: After exclusions, there were 48 EAMS submissions, consisting of 48 indications and 32 drugs. 60% of indications were for cancer. Only 7% of EAMS submissions were based on double-blind, placebo-controlled randomised trials. The average sample size of studies conducted for the EAMS was 654. Most studies used surrogate (76%) and/or survival (57%) outcomes. Only 17% used subjective outcomes. For 17% of the indications, no ongoing studies were being conducted. Animal studies were conducted preclinically for all drugs and 35% also conducted in vitro studies. 47% of the drugs had elevated rates of suspected adverse reaction reports according to pharmacovigilance data.

Conclusions: We recommend that the EAMS drugs with elevated reporting rates are reviewed, that future studies of EAMS drugs use patient-centred outcomes, that preclinical studies make greater use of human biology-based approaches, that post-approval trials are conducted, and that future reviews of the EAMS centre the experience of patients.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
16
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: JRSM Open is a peer reviewed online-only journal that follows the open-access publishing model. It is a companion journal to the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine. The journal publishes research papers, research letters, clinical and methodological reviews, and case reports. Our aim is to inform practice and policy making in clinical medicine. The journal has an international and multispecialty readership that includes primary care and public health professionals.
×
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