Italian Medicines Agency (AIFA), Via del Tritone, 181-00187, Rome, Italy.
European Medicines Agency (EMA), 30 Churchill Place, London, E14 5EU, United Kingdom.
Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2018 May;84(5):1013-1019. doi: 10.1111/bcp.13524. Epub 2018 Mar 5.
The parallel regulatory-health technology assessment scientific advice (PSA) procedure allows manufacturers to receive simultaneous feedback from both EU regulators and health technology assessment (HTA) bodies on development plans for new medicines. The primary objective of the present study is to investigate whether PSA is integrated in the clinical development programmes for which advice was sought.
Contents of PSA provided by regulators and HTA bodies for each procedure between 2010 and 2015 were analysed. The development of all clinical studies for which PSA had been sought was tracked using three different databases. The rate of uptake of the advice provided by regulators and HTA bodies was assessed on two key variables: comparator/s and primary endpoint.
In terms of uptake of comparator recommendations at the time of PSA in the actual development, our analysis showed that manufacturers implemented comparators to address both the needs of regulators and of at least one HTA body in 12 of 21 studies. For primary endpoints, in all included studies manufacturers addressed both the needs of the regulators and at least one HTA body.
One of the key findings of this analysis is that manufacturers tend to implement changes to the development programme based on both regulatory and HTA advice with regards to the choice of primary endpoint and comparator. It also confirms the challenging choice of the study comparator, for which manufacturers seem to be more inclined to satisfy the regulatory advice. Continuous research efforts in this area are of paramount importance from a public health perspective.
平行监管-卫生技术评估科学咨询(PSA)程序允许制造商同时从欧盟监管机构和卫生技术评估(HTA)机构收到关于新药开发计划的反馈。本研究的主要目的是调查 PSA 是否整合到寻求咨询的临床开发计划中。
分析了 2010 年至 2015 年期间监管机构和 HTA 机构为每个程序提供的 PSA 的内容。使用三个不同的数据库跟踪了所有寻求 PSA 的临床研究的开发情况。评估了监管机构和 HTA 机构提供的建议的两个关键变量的采纳率:对照和主要终点。
就 PSA 时实际开发中对照建议的采纳率而言,我们的分析表明,在 21 项研究中的 12 项研究中,制造商为了满足监管机构和至少一个 HTA 机构的需求,实施了对照。对于主要终点,在所有纳入的研究中,制造商都满足了监管机构和至少一个 HTA 机构的需求。
这项分析的一个关键发现是,制造商倾向于根据监管和 HTA 关于主要终点和对照的建议来改变开发计划。它还证实了研究对照的挑战性选择,制造商似乎更倾向于满足监管建议。从公共卫生的角度来看,在这一领域进行持续的研究努力至关重要。