内部安全咨询小组(ISAG):生物制药公司有效决策的双赢

Eric Cohen, P. Puttfarcken, C. Setze, M. Elizabeth, E. Baùsch, Cheryl Foit, M. Patwardhan
{"title":"内部安全咨询小组(ISAG):生物制药公司有效决策的双赢","authors":"Eric Cohen, P. Puttfarcken, C. Setze, M. Elizabeth, E. Baùsch, Cheryl Foit, M. Patwardhan","doi":"10.35248/2329-6887.21.9.324","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Consultation of external experts (EE) has been a standard used by biopharmaceutical project teams (PT) to help evaluate signals of drug toxicity. This process is challenging and cannot address all the complexities associated with patient safety throughout the lifecycle of a drug. AbbVie is a biopharmaceutical company that launched organ\u0002specific Internal Safety Advisory Groups (ISAG) in 2017 to address these unmet needs. Objective: To describe AbbVie’s ISAG experience from 2017 to the present, including the consultation process, breadth of consultations and methods of self-assessment. Methods: Detailed records for 7 ISAGs (hepatic, renal, ocular, cardiovascular, skin/immunology, neuropsychiatric and health literacy) were reviewed. ISAG recommendations were compared to feedback from EE and regulatory agencies as a means of comparison to industry standards. Results: The ISAGs received 41 consultations within three main categories: (a) clinical case review, (b) clinical trial management and (c) external-facing documents. The hepatic ISAG was consulted with the greatest frequency (n=24). Phase 1 (34%) and post-market (34%) were the phases with the most frequent consultations. Recommendations mirrored feedback from industry standards in 12 of 13 consults. Discussion: ISAGs provide AbbVie with broad, cross-functional expertise that is objective and readily available. Standard approaches to collection, analysis and presentation of data help guide PT and the company as a whole. ISAGs provide guidance to mitigate safety risks and communicate these risks to regulatory authorities, healthcare providers and patients. This ISAG model can be adopted within other biopharmaceutical companies and serve as a template for current or future safety advisory activities.","PeriodicalId":16958,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pharmacovigilance","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Internal Safety Advisory Groups (ISAG): A Win-Win for Effective Decision-Making in Biopharmaceutical Companies\",\"authors\":\"Eric Cohen, P. Puttfarcken, C. Setze, M. Elizabeth, E. Baùsch, Cheryl Foit, M. Patwardhan\",\"doi\":\"10.35248/2329-6887.21.9.324\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Consultation of external experts (EE) has been a standard used by biopharmaceutical project teams (PT) to help evaluate signals of drug toxicity. This process is challenging and cannot address all the complexities associated with patient safety throughout the lifecycle of a drug. AbbVie is a biopharmaceutical company that launched organ\\u0002specific Internal Safety Advisory Groups (ISAG) in 2017 to address these unmet needs. Objective: To describe AbbVie’s ISAG experience from 2017 to the present, including the consultation process, breadth of consultations and methods of self-assessment. Methods: Detailed records for 7 ISAGs (hepatic, renal, ocular, cardiovascular, skin/immunology, neuropsychiatric and health literacy) were reviewed. ISAG recommendations were compared to feedback from EE and regulatory agencies as a means of comparison to industry standards. Results: The ISAGs received 41 consultations within three main categories: (a) clinical case review, (b) clinical trial management and (c) external-facing documents. The hepatic ISAG was consulted with the greatest frequency (n=24). Phase 1 (34%) and post-market (34%) were the phases with the most frequent consultations. Recommendations mirrored feedback from industry standards in 12 of 13 consults. Discussion: ISAGs provide AbbVie with broad, cross-functional expertise that is objective and readily available. Standard approaches to collection, analysis and presentation of data help guide PT and the company as a whole. ISAGs provide guidance to mitigate safety risks and communicate these risks to regulatory authorities, healthcare providers and patients. This ISAG model can be adopted within other biopharmaceutical companies and serve as a template for current or future safety advisory activities.\",\"PeriodicalId\":16958,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Pharmacovigilance\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Pharmacovigilance\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.35248/2329-6887.21.9.324\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pharmacovigilance","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.35248/2329-6887.21.9.324","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

外部专家咨询(EE)一直是生物制药项目团队(PT)用来帮助评估药物毒性信号的标准。这一过程具有挑战性,无法解决药物整个生命周期中与患者安全相关的所有复杂性。艾伯维是一家生物制药公司,于2017年启动了器官特定内部安全咨询小组(ISAG),以解决这些未满足的需求。目的:描述艾伯维2017年至今的ISAG经验,包括咨询流程、咨询广度和自我评估方法。方法:回顾7例isag(肝、肾、眼、心血管、皮肤/免疫、神经精神和健康素养)的详细记录。ISAG的建议与EE和监管机构的反馈进行了比较,作为与行业标准进行比较的手段。结果:ISAGs共接受了41次咨询,主要分为三个类别:(a)临床病例审查,(b)临床试验管理和(c)面向外部的文件。咨询肝脏ISAG的频率最高(n=24)。第一阶段(34%)和上市后(34%)是咨询最频繁的阶段。在13次咨询中,有12次的建议反映了来自行业标准的反馈。讨论:isag为艾伯维提供了广泛的、跨职能的专业知识,这是客观的、随时可用的。收集、分析和展示数据的标准方法有助于指导PT和整个公司。isag为减轻安全风险提供指导,并将这些风险告知监管机构、医疗保健提供者和患者。该ISAG模式可在其他生物制药公司中采用,并可作为当前或未来安全咨询活动的模板。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Internal Safety Advisory Groups (ISAG): A Win-Win for Effective Decision-Making in Biopharmaceutical Companies
Consultation of external experts (EE) has been a standard used by biopharmaceutical project teams (PT) to help evaluate signals of drug toxicity. This process is challenging and cannot address all the complexities associated with patient safety throughout the lifecycle of a drug. AbbVie is a biopharmaceutical company that launched organspecific Internal Safety Advisory Groups (ISAG) in 2017 to address these unmet needs. Objective: To describe AbbVie’s ISAG experience from 2017 to the present, including the consultation process, breadth of consultations and methods of self-assessment. Methods: Detailed records for 7 ISAGs (hepatic, renal, ocular, cardiovascular, skin/immunology, neuropsychiatric and health literacy) were reviewed. ISAG recommendations were compared to feedback from EE and regulatory agencies as a means of comparison to industry standards. Results: The ISAGs received 41 consultations within three main categories: (a) clinical case review, (b) clinical trial management and (c) external-facing documents. The hepatic ISAG was consulted with the greatest frequency (n=24). Phase 1 (34%) and post-market (34%) were the phases with the most frequent consultations. Recommendations mirrored feedback from industry standards in 12 of 13 consults. Discussion: ISAGs provide AbbVie with broad, cross-functional expertise that is objective and readily available. Standard approaches to collection, analysis and presentation of data help guide PT and the company as a whole. ISAGs provide guidance to mitigate safety risks and communicate these risks to regulatory authorities, healthcare providers and patients. This ISAG model can be adopted within other biopharmaceutical companies and serve as a template for current or future safety advisory activities.
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
0
×
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