Fruhner Kevin, Hartmann Gunther, Sudhop Thomas
Institute of Clinical Chemistry and Clinical Pharmacology, University Hospital, University of Bonn, Sigmund-Freud-Straße 25, 53127, Bonn, Germany.
Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices (BfArM), Kurt-Georg-Kiesinger-Allee 3, 53175, Bonn, Germany.
Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2017 Dec;73(12):1565-1577. doi: 10.1007/s00228-017-2335-y. Epub 2017 Sep 18.
While in the past, most clinical trial applications (CTAs) following non-integrated (standard) protocols were used to investigate one primary objective concerning a (new) drug, nowadays, the use of integrated protocols investigating multiple objectives within the same CTA becomes more and more popular. The aims of the present study were to investigate the usage and the impact of integrated protocols on regulatory activities and to find the motivation for their increasing use.
Two thousand nine hundred sixty-nine phase I and I/II CTAs submitted to the German Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices (BfArM) during the time period from August 1, 2004, until August 31, 2014, were analysed with regard to protocol and sponsor status, duration until initial authorisation and the number of substantial amendments and their respective approval times. Additionally, applicants who submitted integrated protocols to BfArM were interviewed with respect to their opinion on integrated protocols in an online survey.
The percentage of integrated protocols has constantly increased by approximately 10% within the last 10 years from 17.9% in 2004 to 28.2% in 2014. It could be shown that authorisation procedures with single integrated protocols take significantly longer until initial authorisation (58 vs. 53 days) requires more substantial amendments (1.9 vs. 1.2 amendments per CTA) and the approval of the entirety of amendments takes longer to process as compared to standard protocols (22 vs. 14 days). Nevertheless, applicants prefer the use of integrated protocols due to higher time and cost economy for the entire phase I development process.
Although clinical trials (CTs) following integrated protocols are partly more time-consuming and costly, still, time and/or money may be saved during drug development due to the fact that overall, fewer CTs are needed than with standard protocols. Hence, the main reason for the increasing use of integrated protocols is improved time and cost efficiencies when conducting CTs.
过去,大多数遵循非整合(标准)方案的临床试验申请(CTA)用于研究关于一种(新)药物的一个主要目标,而如今,在同一CTA中研究多个目标的整合方案的使用越来越普遍。本研究的目的是调查整合方案的使用情况及其对监管活动的影响,并找出其使用增加的动机。
分析了2004年8月1日至2014年8月31日期间提交给德国联邦药品和医疗器械研究所(BfArM)的2969项I期和I/II期CTA,涉及方案和申办者状态、直至首次批准的持续时间、重大修订的数量及其各自的批准时间。此外,对向BfArM提交整合方案的申请人进行了在线调查,询问他们对整合方案的看法。
在过去10年中,整合方案的百分比持续增加,从2004年的17.9%增至2014年的28.2%,增幅约为10%。结果表明,与标准方案相比,单一整合方案的授权程序直至首次批准所需时间显著更长(58天对53天),需要更多的重大修订(每个CTA 1.9次修订对1.2次修订),且整个修订的批准处理时间更长(22天对14天)。然而,由于在整个I期研发过程中具有更高的时间和成本效益,申请人更倾向于使用整合方案。
尽管遵循整合方案的临床试验在一定程度上更耗时且成本更高,但由于总体上比标准方案所需的CT数量更少,在药物研发过程中仍可能节省时间和/或金钱。因此,整合方案使用增加的主要原因是进行CT时提高了时间和成本效率。