• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
Cross-comparison of cancer drug approvals at three international regulatory agencies.三个国际监管机构对癌症药物批准情况的交叉比较。
Curr Oncol. 2016 Oct;23(5):e454-e460. doi: 10.3747/co.23.2803. Epub 2016 Oct 25.
2
Approval of Cancer Drugs With Uncertain Therapeutic Value: A Comparison of Regulatory Decisions in Europe and the United States.具有不确定治疗价值的癌症药物的批准:欧洲和美国的监管决策比较。
Milbank Q. 2020 Dec;98(4):1219-1256. doi: 10.1111/1468-0009.12476. Epub 2020 Oct 6.
3
Priority review drugs approved by the FDA and the EMA: time for international regulatory harmonization of pharmaceuticals?美国食品药品监督管理局(FDA)和欧洲药品管理局(EMA)批准的优先审评药物:是时候实现药品国际监管协调了吗?
Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2015 Jul;24(7):709-15. doi: 10.1002/pds.3793. Epub 2015 May 27.
4
To what degree are review outcomes aligned for new active substances (NASs) between the European Medicines Agency and the US Food and Drug Administration? A comparison based on publicly available information for NASs initially approved in the time period 2014 to 2016.欧洲药品管理局和美国食品药品监督管理局对新活性物质(NASs)的审评结果一致性如何?基于2014年至2016年期间首次获批的NASs公开信息进行的比较。
BMJ Open. 2019 Nov 25;9(11):e028677. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-028677.
5
New Oncologic Drugs from 2008 to 2023-Differences in Approval and Access between the United States, Europe and Brazil.2008 年至 2023 年的新型肿瘤药物——美国、欧洲和巴西在审批和可及性方面的差异。
Curr Oncol. 2024 Aug 2;31(8):4443-4454. doi: 10.3390/curroncol31080332.
6
Clinical benefit, reimbursement outcomes, and prices of FDA-approved cancer drugs reviewed through Project Orbis in the USA, Canada, England, and Scotland: a retrospective, comparative analysis.在美国、加拿大、英国和苏格兰,通过项目观测网(Orbis)审查的 FDA 批准的癌症药物的临床获益、报销结果和价格:一项回顾性、比较分析。
Lancet Oncol. 2024 Aug;25(8):979-988. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(24)00286-9. Epub 2024 Jul 11.
7
Regulatory approval of pharmaceuticals without a randomised controlled study: analysis of EMA and FDA approvals 1999-2014.未经随机对照研究的药品监管批准:对欧洲药品管理局(EMA)和美国食品药品监督管理局(FDA)1999 - 2014年批准情况的分析
BMJ Open. 2016 Jun 30;6(6):e011666. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-011666.
8
A comparison of new drugs approved by the FDA, the EMA, and Swissmedic: an assessment of the international harmonization of drugs.美国食品药品监督管理局(FDA)、欧洲药品管理局(EMA)和瑞士药品监管局(Swissmedic)批准的新药对比:药品国际协调评估
Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2018 Jun;74(6):811-818. doi: 10.1007/s00228-018-2431-7. Epub 2018 Feb 22.
9
Initial and supplementary indication approval of new targeted cancer drugs by the FDA, EMA, Health Canada, and TGA.美国食品药品监督管理局(FDA)、欧洲药品管理局(EMA)、加拿大卫生部(Health Canada)和澳大利亚治疗用品管理局(TGA)对新型靶向抗癌药物的初始和补充适应证批准。
Invest New Drugs. 2022 Aug;40(4):798-809. doi: 10.1007/s10637-022-01227-5. Epub 2022 Apr 7.
10
FDA and EMA Approvals of New Breast Cancer Drugs-A Comparative Regulatory Analysis.美国食品药品监督管理局和欧洲药品管理局对新型乳腺癌药物的批准——一项对比性监管分析
Cancers (Basel). 2020 Feb 13;12(2):437. doi: 10.3390/cancers12020437.

引用本文的文献

1
Disparities in the access to immune checkpoint inhibitors approved in the United States, the European Union and mainland China: a serial cross-sectional study.美国、欧盟和中国大陆获批的免疫检查点抑制剂可及性差异:一项系列横断面研究
BMJ Public Health. 2025 Mar 13;3(1):e001995. doi: 10.1136/bmjph-2024-001995. eCollection 2025 Jan.
2
New Anticancer Drugs: Reliably Assessing "Value" While Addressing High Prices.新型抗癌药物:在解决高价问题的同时,可靠地评估“价值”。
Curr Oncol. 2024 Apr 28;31(5):2453-2480. doi: 10.3390/curroncol31050184.
3
Comparison of Cancer-Related Spending and Mortality Rates in the US vs 21 High-Income Countries.美国与 21 个高收入国家的癌症相关支出和死亡率比较。
JAMA Health Forum. 2022 May 27;3(5):e221229. doi: 10.1001/jamahealthforum.2022.1229. eCollection 2022 May.
4
Characteristics and survival of patients with cancer with intended off-label use-a cohort study.癌症患者意图超适应证使用的特征和生存情况:一项队列研究。
BMJ Open. 2022 May 24;12(5):e060453. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-060453.
5
Access Denied? The Unintended Consequences of Pending Drug Pricing Rules.受阻的准入?待决药品定价规则的意外后果。
Curr Oncol. 2022 Apr 2;29(4):2504-2508. doi: 10.3390/curroncol29040204.
6
An international comparative analysis of public reimbursement of orphan drugs in Canadian provinces compared to European countries.对加拿大省份与欧洲国家的孤儿药公共报销进行的国际比较分析。
Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2022 Mar 4;17(1):113. doi: 10.1186/s13023-022-02260-6.
7
Treatment Access, Health Economics, and the Wave of a Magic Wand.治疗可及性、健康经济学与神奇魔杖的挥动。
Curr Oncol. 2022 Feb 16;29(2):1176-1189. doi: 10.3390/curroncol29020100.
8
Survival in Women with De Novo Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Comparison of Real-World Evidence from a Publicly-Funded Canadian Province and the United States by Insurance Status.初诊转移性乳腺癌女性的生存:按保险状况比较来自公费加拿大省份和美国的真实世界证据。
Curr Oncol. 2022 Jan 16;29(1):383-391. doi: 10.3390/curroncol29010034.
9
Association of Supporting Trial Evidence and Reimbursement for Off-Label Use of Cancer Drugs.支持试验证据与癌症药物标签外使用报销的关联。
JAMA Netw Open. 2021 Mar 1;4(3):e210380. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.0380.
10
To what degree are review outcomes aligned for new active substances (NASs) between the European Medicines Agency and the US Food and Drug Administration? A comparison based on publicly available information for NASs initially approved in the time period 2014 to 2016.欧洲药品管理局和美国食品药品监督管理局对新活性物质(NASs)的审评结果一致性如何?基于2014年至2016年期间首次获批的NASs公开信息进行的比较。
BMJ Open. 2019 Nov 25;9(11):e028677. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-028677.

本文引用的文献

1
Accelerated access to innovative medicines for patients in need.加速为有需要的患者提供创新药物。
Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2014 Nov;96(5):559-71. doi: 10.1038/clpt.2014.145. Epub 2014 Jul 9.
2
Use of multiple endpoints and approval paths depicts a decade of FDA oncology drug approvals.多终点和审批途径的使用描绘了 FDA 肿瘤药物批准的十年历程。
Clin Cancer Res. 2013 Jul 15;19(14):3722-31. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-13-0316. Epub 2013 May 10.
3
Approval probabilities and regulatory review patterns for anticancer drugs in the European Union.在欧盟,抗癌药物的审批概率和监管审查模式。
Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2013 Aug;87(2):112-21. doi: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2013.01.004. Epub 2013 Feb 20.
4
Regulatory review of novel therapeutics--comparison of three regulatory agencies.新型治疗药物的监管审查——三个监管机构的比较。
N Engl J Med. 2012 Jun 14;366(24):2284-93. doi: 10.1056/NEJMsa1200223. Epub 2012 May 16.
5
Evaluation of oncology drugs at the European Medicines Agency and US Food and Drug Administration: when differences have an impact on clinical practice.评价欧洲药品管理局和美国食品药品监督管理局的肿瘤药物:差异何时对临床实践产生影响。
J Clin Oncol. 2011 Jun 1;29(16):2266-72. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2010.34.1248. Epub 2011 May 2.
6
Accelerated approval of oncology products: the food and drug administration experience.肿瘤学产品的加速审批:美国食品和药物管理局的经验。
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011 Apr 20;103(8):636-44. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djr062. Epub 2011 Mar 21.
7
Accelerated drug approval: FDA may get tougher; companies cite hurdles.加速药物批准:美国食品药品监督管理局(FDA)可能会更加严格;企业列举障碍。
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011 Mar 16;103(6):455-7. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djr087. Epub 2011 Mar 10.
8
Lessons from 60 years of pharmaceutical innovation.60年药物创新的经验教训。
Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2009 Dec;8(12):959-68. doi: 10.1038/nrd2961.
9
Accelerated approval of cancer drugs: improved access to therapeutic breakthroughs or early release of unsafe and ineffective drugs?癌症药物的加速批准:是改善了对治疗突破的获取,还是过早放行不安全且无效的药物?
J Clin Oncol. 2009 Sep 10;27(26):4398-405. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2008.21.1961. Epub 2009 Jul 27.
10
Examination of the relationship between oncology drug labeling revision frequency and FDA product categorization.肿瘤学药物标签修订频率与美国食品药品监督管理局(FDA)产品分类之间关系的研究。
Am J Public Health. 2009 Sep;99(9):1693-8. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2008.141010. Epub 2009 Apr 16.

三个国际监管机构对癌症药物批准情况的交叉比较。

Cross-comparison of cancer drug approvals at three international regulatory agencies.

作者信息

Samuel N, Verma S

机构信息

MD/PhD Program, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON.

Tom Baker Cancer Centre, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB.

出版信息

Curr Oncol. 2016 Oct;23(5):e454-e460. doi: 10.3747/co.23.2803. Epub 2016 Oct 25.

DOI:10.3747/co.23.2803
PMID:27803605
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5081017/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

The primary objective of the present study was to examine the drug approval process and the time to approval (tta) for cancer drugs by 3 major international regulatory bodies-Health Canada, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (fda), and the European Medicines Agency (ema)-and to explore differences in the drug approval processes that might contribute to any disparities.

METHODS

The publicly available Health Canada Drug Product Database was surveyed for all marketed antineoplastic agents approved between 1 January 2005 and 1 June 2013. For the resulting set of cancer drugs, public records of sponsor submission and approval dates by Health Canada, the fda, and the ema were obtained.

RESULTS

Overall, the tta for the 37 antineoplastic agents that met the study criteria was significantly less for the fda than for the ema (X̄ = 6.7 months, < 0.001) or for Health Canada (X̄ = 6.4 months, < 0.001). The tta was not significantly different for Health Canada and the ema (X̄ = 0.65 months, = 0.89). An analysis of the review processes demonstrated that the primary reason for the identified discrepancies in tta was the disparate use of accelerated approval mechanisms.

SUMMARY

In the present study, we systematically compared cancer drug approvals at 3 international regulatory bodies. The differences in tta reflect several important considerations in the regulatory framework of cancer drug approvals. Those findings warrant an enhanced dialogue between clinicians and government agencies to understand opportunities and challenges in the current approval processes and to work toward balancing drug safety with timely access.

摘要

背景

本研究的主要目的是考察加拿大卫生部、美国食品药品监督管理局(FDA)和欧洲药品管理局(EMA)这3个主要国际监管机构对癌症药物的审批流程和审批时间,并探究可能导致差异的药物审批流程差异。

方法

对加拿大卫生部药品数据库中2005年1月1日至2013年6月1日期间批准上市的所有抗肿瘤药物进行调查。对于由此得到的一组癌症药物,获取了加拿大卫生部、FDA和EMA的申办方提交日期和批准日期的公开记录。

结果

总体而言,符合研究标准的37种抗肿瘤药物的FDA审批时间显著短于EMA(X̄ = 6.7个月,< 0.001)或加拿大卫生部(X̄ = 6.4个月,< 0.001)。加拿大卫生部和EMA的审批时间没有显著差异(X̄ = 0.65个月,= 0.89)。对审评流程的分析表明,审批时间差异的主要原因是加速审批机制的不同使用。

总结

在本研究中,我们系统地比较了3个国际监管机构对癌症药物的审批情况。审批时间的差异反映了癌症药物审批监管框架中的几个重要考量因素。这些发现值得临床医生和政府机构加强对话,以了解当前审批流程中的机遇和挑战,并努力在药物安全性与及时可及性之间取得平衡。