Suppr超能文献

2012年至2022年期间,欧洲药品管理局在孤儿药维持治疗评估中使用了哪些临床试验设计和统计方法?一项横断面研究。

Which clinical trial designs and statistical approaches have been used in assessments of orphan maintenance by the European Medicines Agency between 2012 and 2022? A cross-sectional study.

作者信息

Windfuhr Fabian, Larsson Kristina, Framke Theodor, Lasch Florian

机构信息

European Medicines Agency, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Department of Clinical Pharmacy and Pharmacology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.

出版信息

BMJ Open. 2024 Dec 22;14(12):e086171. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-086171.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

In the European Union, a new orphan medicinal product must demonstrate 'significant benefit' over approved medicinal products targeting the same indication. To demonstrate a significant benefit, comparisons between the new product and the already approved medicinal products-either directly by a head-to-head comparison within a clinical trial or indirectly as a cross-trial comparison-are necessary. In this study, we investigate the types of trial designs and statistical approaches used for demonstrating a significant benefit of a new orphan medicinal product against approved comparators used between 2012 and 2022.

DESIGN

This is a cross-sectional study based on the European Medicines Agency's 'orphan maintenance' assessment documents between 2012 and 2022. All documents were manually reviewed to extract structured data on the following outcome measures:For every comparison between a new orphan medicinal product and a comparator used for demonstrating a significant benefit as part of an orphan maintenance procedure, we recorded the type and design of the data source and the type of statistical methodology used for the comparison.

RESULTS

We identified 151 EMA orphan maintenance procedures with a positive decision that required the demonstration of a significant benefit. Within these 151 procedures, 418 comparisons between medicinal products were identified. Indirect comparisons are the most common approach for comparing the new orphan medicinal product to a relevant comparator (44%, 182/418), followed by qualitative comparisons (39%, 162/418) and direct comparisons (18%, 74/418). Among the indirect comparisons, naive side-by-side comparisons are most often used (71%, 129/182), whereas inferential approaches that adjust for population differences and quantify the uncertainty of the comparison are used less often (29%, 53/182). Although there is no clear time trend in the prevalence of any specific comparison type, we find that inferential indirect comparison methods approximately doubled between the first and second half of the reviewed time frame.

CONCLUSIONS

Indirect comparisons play an important role in demonstrating a significant benefit in the assessment of orphan products. Further work is needed to evaluate the appropriateness of different methodologies.

摘要

目标

在欧盟,一种新的孤儿药必须证明其相对于针对相同适应症的已批准药品具有“显著益处”。为了证明显著益处,需要在新产品与已批准药品之间进行比较——要么在临床试验中通过直接的头对头比较,要么作为跨试验比较进行间接比较。在本研究中,我们调查了2012年至2022年期间用于证明新孤儿药相对于已批准对照药具有显著益处的试验设计类型和统计方法。

设计

这是一项基于欧洲药品管理局2012年至2022年期间“孤儿药维持”评估文件的横断面研究。对所有文件进行人工审查,以提取以下结果指标的结构化数据:对于新孤儿药与作为孤儿药维持程序一部分用于证明显著益处的对照药之间的每一次比较,我们记录了数据源的类型和设计以及用于比较的统计方法类型。

结果

我们确定了151项欧洲药品管理局孤儿药维持程序,这些程序做出了需要证明显著益处的肯定决定。在这151项程序中,确定了418次药品之间的比较。间接比较是将新孤儿药与相关对照药进行比较的最常见方法(44%,182/418),其次是定性比较(39%,162/418)和直接比较(18%,74/418)。在间接比较中,最常使用的是简单的并排比较(71%,129/182),而针对人群差异进行调整并量化比较不确定性的推断方法使用较少(29%,53/182)。尽管任何特定比较类型的流行率没有明显的时间趋势,但我们发现,在审查时间框架的前半期和后半期之间,推断性间接比较方法的使用频率大约翻了一番。

结论

间接比较在孤儿药评估中证明显著益处方面发挥着重要作用。需要进一步开展工作来评估不同方法的适用性。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/40aa/11667437/c6f462fe7640/bmjopen-14-12-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验