Bertele' Vittorio, Banzi Rita, Capasso Filippo, Tafuri Giovanni, Trotta Francesco, Apolone Giovanni, Garattini Silvio
Laboratory of Regulatory Policies, Mario Negri Institute for Pharmacological Research, Via Eritrea 62, 20157 Milan, Italy.
Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2007 Jul;63(7):713-9. doi: 10.1007/s00228-007-0296-2. Epub 2007 May 25.
Current European regulations only require drugs to be safe and effective, although there is heavy demand for comparative efficacy data to demonstrate the added value of new drugs. The objective of the analysis reported here was to assess the added value of new anticancer drugs for haematological malignancies that have been approved by the European Medicines Agency (EMEA) based on the clinical data provided at the time of submission.
Information on the evidence supporting the approval was extracted from the European Public Assessment Reports (EPARs). Documents were surveyed for new applications and for subsequent extensions between January 1995, when the EMEA was set up, and May 2006. The added value of newly approved drugs was assessed by an algorithm that evaluates the strength of evidence based on methodological appropriateness (randomised comparison) and the importance of clinical advantage (in terms of the magnitude of benefit, hardness of outcome measures, adequacy of comparator).
Eleven anticancer drugs were analysed. Of 17 indications, nine (53%) were approved on the basis of single-arm trials (SATs), and eight (47%) were approved on the basis of randomised controlled (clinical) trials (RCTs). The most frequently used endpoint was response rate (12 of 17 indications, 70%). On the basis of our criteria, only four of the 11 drugs show a consistent added value.
We were unable to establish an added value for about two thirds of the drugs evaluated in this study, primarily due to methodological aspects related to study design and endpoint robustness.
当前欧洲法规仅要求药物安全有效,尽管对比较疗效数据以证明新药附加值的需求很大。本文所报告分析的目的是根据提交时提供的临床数据,评估欧洲药品管理局(EMEA)批准的用于血液系统恶性肿瘤的新型抗癌药物的附加值。
从欧洲公共评估报告(EPARs)中提取支持批准的证据信息。对1995年1月(EMEA成立之时)至2006年5月期间的新申请及后续延期申请的文件进行了调查。通过一种算法评估新批准药物的附加值,该算法根据方法学的适当性(随机对照)和临床优势的重要性(根据获益程度、结局指标的严格程度、对照的充分性)来评估证据强度。
分析了11种抗癌药物。在17个适应症中,9个(53%)基于单臂试验(SATs)获批,8个(47%)基于随机对照(临床)试验(RCTs)获批。最常用的终点是缓解率(在17个适应症中有12个,占70%)。根据我们的标准,11种药物中只有4种显示出一致的附加值。
在本研究评估的药物中,约三分之二无法确定其附加值,主要是由于与研究设计和终点稳健性相关的方法学方面的原因。