• 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

量化在欧洲获得营销授权的关键试验中的多样性和代表性。

Quantifying Diversity and Representation in Pivotal Trials Leading to Marketing Authorization in Europe.

机构信息

Tufts CSDD, Boston, MA, USA.

出版信息

Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2022 Sep;56(5):795-804. doi: 10.1007/s43441-022-00421-0. Epub 2022 Jun 9.

DOI:10.1007/s43441-022-00421-0
PMID:35680722
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Following up on a study from 2019, Tufts CSDD collected and analyzed data on demographic disparities and representation in pivotal trials supporting the marketing authorization of novel drugs and biologics approved in Europe between 2007 and 2019.

METHODS

Data were collected from products' EPAR, the EUDRACT database, and other publicly available sources, and compared to indication-specific demographic data or a census estimate. In total, data were collected on 446 drugs and 943 pivotal trials.

RESULTS

Results indicated that gender demographic data were only reported for 80.7% of pivotal trials, and that racial and ethnicity demographic data were reported less often (64.1% and 29.9% of pivotal trials, respectively). Results also indicated that non-white racial identities were under-represented by more than 20% in nearly half or more of pivotal trials.

CONCLUSIONS

Guidelines encouraging the reporting of patient demographic data are insufficient and availability of the data is problematic. The available data suggest that under-representation in pivotal trials is widespread.

摘要

背景

在 2019 年的一项研究之后,塔夫茨 CSDD 收集和分析了数据,这些数据涉及在 2007 年至 2019 年间支持在欧洲获得批准的新型药物和生物制品营销许可的关键试验中的人口统计学差异和代表性。

方法

数据来自产品的 EPAR、EUDRACT 数据库和其他公开来源,并与特定适应症的人口统计学数据或人口普查估计进行了比较。总共收集了 446 种药物和 943 项关键试验的数据。

结果

结果表明,只有 80.7%的关键试验报告了性别人口统计学数据,而种族和民族人口统计学数据的报告频率较低(分别为 64.1%和 29.9%的关键试验)。结果还表明,近一半或更多的关键试验中,非白色种族身份的代表性不足 20%。

结论

鼓励报告患者人口统计学数据的指南不足,并且数据的可用性存在问题。现有数据表明,关键试验中的代表性不足是普遍存在的。

相似文献

1
Quantifying Diversity and Representation in Pivotal Trials Leading to Marketing Authorization in Europe.量化在欧洲获得营销授权的关键试验中的多样性和代表性。
Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2022 Sep;56(5):795-804. doi: 10.1007/s43441-022-00421-0. Epub 2022 Jun 9.
2
Quantifying Patient Subpopulation Disparities in New Drugs and Biologics Approved Between 2007 and 2017.量化 2007 年至 2017 年间批准的新药和生物制剂在患者亚群中的差异。
Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2020 Nov;54(6):1541-1550. doi: 10.1007/s43441-020-00181-9. Epub 2020 Jun 18.
3
New Benchmarks on Demographic Disparities in Pivotal Trials Supporting FDA-Approved Drugs and Biologics.支持FDA批准的药物和生物制品的关键试验中人口统计学差异的新基准。
Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2024 Jan;58(1):143-152. doi: 10.1007/s43441-023-00579-1. Epub 2023 Sep 29.
4
Cancer drugs for solid tumors approved by the EMA since 2014: an overview of pivotal clinical trials.自 2014 年以来欧洲药品管理局批准的实体瘤治疗药物:关键性临床试验概述。
Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2020 Jun;76(6):843-850. doi: 10.1007/s00228-020-02850-y. Epub 2020 Mar 3.
5
Under-representation of racial minorities in prostate cancer studies submitted to the US Food and Drug Administration to support potential marketing approval, 1993-2013.1993 年至 2013 年,向美国食品和药物管理局提交的支持潜在营销批准的前列腺癌研究中,少数族裔代表性不足。
Cancer. 2014 Oct 1;120(19):3025-32. doi: 10.1002/cncr.28809. Epub 2014 Jun 25.
6
Participation of the elderly, women, and minorities in pivotal trials supporting 2011-2013 U.S. Food and Drug Administration approvals.老年人、女性和少数族裔参与支持2011 - 2013年美国食品药品监督管理局批准的关键试验情况。
Trials. 2016 Apr 14;17:199. doi: 10.1186/s13063-016-1322-4.
7
Characteristics of race/ethnicity in trials leading to anti-rheumatic drug approval for inflammatory arthritis by the US Food and Drug Administration.美国食品和药物管理局批准的治疗炎症性关节炎的抗风湿药物临床试验中的种族/民族特征。
Int J Rheum Dis. 2023 Dec;26(12):2489-2497. doi: 10.1111/1756-185X.14944. Epub 2023 Oct 18.
8
Clinical evidence supporting the marketing authorization of biosimilars in Europe.支持生物类似药在欧洲获得营销授权的临床证据。
Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2020 Apr;76(4):557-566. doi: 10.1007/s00228-019-02805-y. Epub 2020 Jan 2.
9
Demographics of clinical trials participants in pivotal clinical trials for new molecular entity drugs and biologics approved by FDA From 2010 to 2012.2010年至2012年美国食品药品监督管理局(FDA)批准的新分子实体药物和生物制品关键临床试验中参与者的人口统计学数据
Am J Ther. 2015 Nov-Dec;22(6):435-55. doi: 10.1097/MJT.0000000000000177.
10
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.

引用本文的文献

1
New Benchmarks on Demographic Disparities in Pivotal Trials Supporting FDA-Approved Drugs and Biologics.支持FDA批准的药物和生物制品的关键试验中人口统计学差异的新基准。
Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2024 Jan;58(1):143-152. doi: 10.1007/s43441-023-00579-1. Epub 2023 Sep 29.
2
Real-world evidence: new opportunities for osteoporosis research. Recommendations from a Working Group from the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases (ESCEO).真实世界证据:骨质疏松症研究的新机遇。来自欧洲临床和经济骨关节炎、骨质疏松症和肌肉骨骼疾病学会(ESCEO)的工作组的建议。
Osteoporos Int. 2023 Aug;34(8):1283-1299. doi: 10.1007/s00198-023-06827-2. Epub 2023 Jun 23.

本文引用的文献

1
Is there evidence for the racialization of pharmaceutical regulation? Systematic comparison of new drugs approved over five years in the USA and the EU.是否有药物监管种族化的证据?对美国和欧盟五年内批准的新药进行系统比较。
Soc Sci Med. 2021 Jul;280:114049. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.114049. Epub 2021 May 20.
2
Making a COVID-19 vaccine that works for everyone: ensuring equity and inclusivity in clinical trials.为所有人制造有效的 COVID-19 疫苗:确保临床试验中的公平性和包容性。
Glob Health Action. 2021 Jan 1;14(1):1892309. doi: 10.1080/16549716.2021.1892309.
3
Quantifying Patient Subpopulation Disparities in New Drugs and Biologics Approved Between 2007 and 2017.
量化 2007 年至 2017 年间批准的新药和生物制剂在患者亚群中的差异。
Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2020 Nov;54(6):1541-1550. doi: 10.1007/s43441-020-00181-9. Epub 2020 Jun 18.
4
Differential Globalization of Industry- and Non-Industry-Sponsored Clinical Trials.行业资助与非行业资助的临床试验的差异化全球化。
PLoS One. 2015 Dec 14;10(12):e0145122. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0145122. eCollection 2015.