2020年fda批准的新药疗效终点及剂量分析

IF 1.6 Q3 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL
Albert Tang
{"title":"2020年fda批准的新药疗效终点及剂量分析","authors":"Albert Tang","doi":"10.1016/j.curtheres.2022.100680","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>During 2020, the Food and Drug Administration approved 53 novel drugs.</p></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><p>Biomarkers, surrogate endpoints and dosing regimens used in early and pivotal clinical stages are evaluated.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Information on various efficacy end points of 2020 Food and Drug Administration approved novel drugs was gathered from the Drug Approvals and Databases page of the Food and Drug Administration website. Endpoint data from efficacy end points for the 2019 approved novel drugs by Tong and Wang are used as a comparison.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Among the 53 drugs approved during 2020, 49 were for treatment of various diseases and 4 were for diagnostics. Twenty-five drug approvals (51%, relative to 49 drugs for treatment of diseases) were based on surrogate end points, consisting of 12 accelerated approvals and 13 regular approvals. There were 19 drug approvals for cancer treatments (39%, relative to 49 drugs for treatment of diseases). During 2019, there were 48 drugs approved. Forty-four were for treatment of various diseases and 4 were for diagnostics. Fourteen drug approvals (32%, relative to 44 drugs for treatment of diseases) were based on surrogate end points, consisting of 9 accelerated approvals and 5 regular approvals. There were 10 drug approvals for cancer treatments (23%, relative to 44 drugs for treatment of diseases).</p><p>The approved doses were usually much closer to the highest dose tested in clinical trials (about 2-fold lower) compared with the lower dose tested in clinical trials (about 11-fold higher). Large and variable distances between the starting low dose in humans and the final approved doses indicate that finding the optimal dose in clinical trials is still a time-consuming and costly process. Further dose analysis for cancer drugs approved during 2020 showed that the distances between the starting dose in human beings and the final approved doses of cancer drugs were still large and variable, similar to distances in noncancer drugs. Stratification of drugs approved in 2020 by molecular weights shows that small molecular weights (&lt;1000 Daltons) appeared to be smaller and less variable than those for drugs with large molecules (&gt;1000 Daltons). (<em>Curr Ther Res Clin Exp</em>. 2022; 83:XXX–XXX)</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Surrogate end points with accelerated approval have been widely used for approvals, with an increasing trend from 2019 to 2020 (32% vs. 51%). The approved doses usually were much higher (10-fold) than the lowest tested dose in first-in-human trials, while much closer (2-fold lower) to the highest dose tested in clinical trials.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":10920,"journal":{"name":"Current Therapeutic Research-clinical and Experimental","volume":"97 ","pages":"Article 100680"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/a4/3c/main.PMC9310132.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficacy End Points and Dose Analysis of Food and Drug Administration-Approved Novel Drugs in 2020\",\"authors\":\"Albert Tang\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.curtheres.2022.100680\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>During 2020, the Food and Drug Administration approved 53 novel drugs.</p></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><p>Biomarkers, surrogate endpoints and dosing regimens used in early and pivotal clinical stages are evaluated.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Information on various efficacy end points of 2020 Food and Drug Administration approved novel drugs was gathered from the Drug Approvals and Databases page of the Food and Drug Administration website. Endpoint data from efficacy end points for the 2019 approved novel drugs by Tong and Wang are used as a comparison.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Among the 53 drugs approved during 2020, 49 were for treatment of various diseases and 4 were for diagnostics. Twenty-five drug approvals (51%, relative to 49 drugs for treatment of diseases) were based on surrogate end points, consisting of 12 accelerated approvals and 13 regular approvals. There were 19 drug approvals for cancer treatments (39%, relative to 49 drugs for treatment of diseases). During 2019, there were 48 drugs approved. Forty-four were for treatment of various diseases and 4 were for diagnostics. Fourteen drug approvals (32%, relative to 44 drugs for treatment of diseases) were based on surrogate end points, consisting of 9 accelerated approvals and 5 regular approvals. There were 10 drug approvals for cancer treatments (23%, relative to 44 drugs for treatment of diseases).</p><p>The approved doses were usually much closer to the highest dose tested in clinical trials (about 2-fold lower) compared with the lower dose tested in clinical trials (about 11-fold higher). Large and variable distances between the starting low dose in humans and the final approved doses indicate that finding the optimal dose in clinical trials is still a time-consuming and costly process. Further dose analysis for cancer drugs approved during 2020 showed that the distances between the starting dose in human beings and the final approved doses of cancer drugs were still large and variable, similar to distances in noncancer drugs. Stratification of drugs approved in 2020 by molecular weights shows that small molecular weights (&lt;1000 Daltons) appeared to be smaller and less variable than those for drugs with large molecules (&gt;1000 Daltons). (<em>Curr Ther Res Clin Exp</em>. 2022; 83:XXX–XXX)</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Surrogate end points with accelerated approval have been widely used for approvals, with an increasing trend from 2019 to 2020 (32% vs. 51%). The approved doses usually were much higher (10-fold) than the lowest tested dose in first-in-human trials, while much closer (2-fold lower) to the highest dose tested in clinical trials.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10920,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Current Therapeutic Research-clinical and Experimental\",\"volume\":\"97 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100680\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/a4/3c/main.PMC9310132.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Current Therapeutic Research-clinical and Experimental\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0011393X22000194\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Therapeutic Research-clinical and Experimental","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0011393X22000194","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在2020年期间,美国食品和药物管理局批准了53种新药。目的评估早期和关键临床阶段使用的生物标志物、替代终点和给药方案。方法从美国食品药品监督管理局网站的药品审批和数据库页面收集2020年fda批准的新药的各个疗效终点信息。使用Tong和Wang 2019年获批新药的疗效终点数据作为比较。结果2020年获批的53种药物中,治疗类药物49种,诊断类药物4种。25种药物批准(51%,相对于49种疾病治疗药物)基于替代终点,包括12种加速批准和13种常规批准。有19种用于癌症治疗的药物获得批准(39%,相对于49种用于疾病治疗的药物)。2019年,共有48种药物获批。44次用于治疗各种疾病,4次用于诊断。14种药物批准(32%,相对于44种疾病治疗药物)基于替代终点,包括9种加速批准和5种常规批准。有10种用于癌症治疗的药物获得批准(23%,相对于44种用于疾病治疗的药物)。批准的剂量通常更接近临床试验中测试的最高剂量(约低2倍),而临床试验中测试的较低剂量(约高11倍)。人体起始低剂量与最终批准剂量之间的巨大和可变距离表明,在临床试验中寻找最佳剂量仍然是一个耗时和昂贵的过程。对2020年批准的癌症药物的进一步剂量分析表明,癌症药物的人类起始剂量与最终批准剂量之间的距离仍然很大且可变,类似于非癌症药物的距离。根据分子量对2020年批准的药物进行分层显示,小分子量(1000道尔顿)似乎比大分子(1000道尔顿)的药物更小,变化更少。(中国临床医学杂志,2022;83: XXX-XXX)结论:加速审批的替代终点已被广泛用于审批,从2019年到2020年有增加趋势(32%对51%)。批准的剂量通常比首次人体试验中最低测试剂量高得多(10倍),而比临床试验中测试的最高剂量更接近(低2倍)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Efficacy End Points and Dose Analysis of Food and Drug Administration-Approved Novel Drugs in 2020

Efficacy End Points and Dose Analysis of Food and Drug Administration-Approved Novel Drugs in 2020

Efficacy End Points and Dose Analysis of Food and Drug Administration-Approved Novel Drugs in 2020

Efficacy End Points and Dose Analysis of Food and Drug Administration-Approved Novel Drugs in 2020

Background

During 2020, the Food and Drug Administration approved 53 novel drugs.

Objective

Biomarkers, surrogate endpoints and dosing regimens used in early and pivotal clinical stages are evaluated.

Methods

Information on various efficacy end points of 2020 Food and Drug Administration approved novel drugs was gathered from the Drug Approvals and Databases page of the Food and Drug Administration website. Endpoint data from efficacy end points for the 2019 approved novel drugs by Tong and Wang are used as a comparison.

Results

Among the 53 drugs approved during 2020, 49 were for treatment of various diseases and 4 were for diagnostics. Twenty-five drug approvals (51%, relative to 49 drugs for treatment of diseases) were based on surrogate end points, consisting of 12 accelerated approvals and 13 regular approvals. There were 19 drug approvals for cancer treatments (39%, relative to 49 drugs for treatment of diseases). During 2019, there were 48 drugs approved. Forty-four were for treatment of various diseases and 4 were for diagnostics. Fourteen drug approvals (32%, relative to 44 drugs for treatment of diseases) were based on surrogate end points, consisting of 9 accelerated approvals and 5 regular approvals. There were 10 drug approvals for cancer treatments (23%, relative to 44 drugs for treatment of diseases).

The approved doses were usually much closer to the highest dose tested in clinical trials (about 2-fold lower) compared with the lower dose tested in clinical trials (about 11-fold higher). Large and variable distances between the starting low dose in humans and the final approved doses indicate that finding the optimal dose in clinical trials is still a time-consuming and costly process. Further dose analysis for cancer drugs approved during 2020 showed that the distances between the starting dose in human beings and the final approved doses of cancer drugs were still large and variable, similar to distances in noncancer drugs. Stratification of drugs approved in 2020 by molecular weights shows that small molecular weights (<1000 Daltons) appeared to be smaller and less variable than those for drugs with large molecules (>1000 Daltons). (Curr Ther Res Clin Exp. 2022; 83:XXX–XXX)

Conclusions

Surrogate end points with accelerated approval have been widely used for approvals, with an increasing trend from 2019 to 2020 (32% vs. 51%). The approved doses usually were much higher (10-fold) than the lowest tested dose in first-in-human trials, while much closer (2-fold lower) to the highest dose tested in clinical trials.

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
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
31
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: We also encourage the submission of manuscripts presenting preclinical and very preliminary research that may stimulate further investigation of potentially relevant findings, as well as in-depth review articles on specific therapies or disease states, and applied health delivery or pharmacoeconomics. CTR encourages and supports the submission of manuscripts describing: • Interventions designed to understand or improve human health, disease treatment or disease prevention; • Studies that focus on problems that are uncommon in resource-rich countries; • Research that is "under-published" because of limited access to monetary resources such as English language support and Open Access fees (CTR offers deeply discounted English language editing); • Republication of articles previously published in non-English journals (eg, evidence-based guidelines) which could be useful if translated into English; • Preclinical and clinical product development studies that are not pursued for further investigation based upon early phase results.
×
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