Real-world evidence for regulatory decision-making: updated guidance from around the world
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Burns L
PROVIDER: S-EPMC10643567 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Jan
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:IntroductionA review of European Union (EU)-funded initiatives linked to 'Real World Evidence' (RWE) was performed to determine whether their outputs could be used for the generation of real-world data able to support the European Medicines Agency (EMA)'s regulatory decision-making on medicines.MethodThe initiatives were identified from publicly available websites. Their topics were categorised into five areas: 'Data source', 'Methodology', 'Governance model', 'Analytical model' and 'Infrastructure'. To assess their immediate relevance for medicines evaluation, their therapeutic areas were compared with the products recommended for EU approval in 2016 and those included in the EMA pharmaceutical business pipeline.ResultsOf 171 originally identified EU-funded initiatives, 65 were selected based on their primary and secondary objectives (35 'Data source' initiatives, 15 'Methodology', 10 'Governance model', 17 'Analytical model' and 25 'Infrastructure'). These 65 initiatives received over 734 million Euros of public funding. At the time of evaluation, the published outputs of the 40 completed initiatives did not always match their original objectives. Overall, public information was limited, data access was not explicit and their sustainability was unclear. The topics matched 8 of 14 therapeutic areas of the products recommended for approval in 2016 and 8 of 15 therapeutic areas in the 2017-2019 pharmaceutical business pipeline. Haematology, gastroenterology or cardiovascular systems were poorly represented.ConclusionsThis landscape of EU-funded initiatives linked to RWE which started before 31 December 2016 highlighted that the immediate utilisation of their outputs to support regulatory decision-making is limited, often due to insufficient available information and to discrepancies between outputs and objectives. Furthermore, the restricted sustainability of the initiatives impacts on their downstream utility. Multiple projects focussing on the same therapeutic areas increase the likelihood of duplication of both efforts and resources. These issues contribute to gaps in generating RWE for medicines and diminish returns on the public funds invested.
| S-EPMC6009620 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThe Health Technology Assessment (HTA) process aims to optimize health system funding of technologies. In recent years there has been an increase in what is known as Real-World Evidence (RWE) as a complement to clinical trials. The objective of Health Technology Assessment International's Latin American Policy Forum 2022 was to explore the utility of incorporating RWE into HTA and decision-making processes in the region.MethodsThis article is based on a background document, survey, and the deliberative work of the country representatives who participated in the Forum.ResultsThere is a growing interest in the use of Real-World Data / Real-World Evidence in HTA processes in Latin America, although currently there are no specific local guidelines for RWE use by HTA agencies. At present, its use is limited to certain areas such as adding context to HTA reports, the evaluation of adverse events, or cost estimation.Potential future uses of RWE were identified, including the creation of risk-sharing agreements, the assessment of technology performance in routine practice, providing information on outcomes that are not so easily evaluated in clinical trials (e.g., the identification of specific subpopulations or quality of life), and the estimation of input parameters for economic evaluations.ConclusionsThe participants agreed that there are several areas presenting significant potential to expand the application of RWD/RWE and that the development of normative frameworks for its use could be helpful.
| S-EPMC11579697 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC6617710 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Real-world evidence (RWE) is an emerging scientific discipline which is being increasingly utilized for decision making on prescription-only medicines. However, there has been little focus to date on the application of RWE within the nonprescription sector. This paper reviews the existing and potential applications of RWE for nonprescription medicines, using the nonprescription medicine life cycle as a framework for discussion. Relevant sources of real-world data (RWD) are reviewed and compared with those available for prescribed medicines. Existing life-cycle data gaps are identified where RWE is required or where use of RWE can complement data from randomized controlled trials. Published RWE examples relating to nonprescription medicines are summarized, and potential relevant future sources of RWD discussed. Challenges and limitations to the use of RWE on nonprescription medicines are discussed, and recommendations made to promote optimal and appropriate use of RWE in this sector. Overall, RWE currently plays a key role in specific phases of the nonprescription medicine life cycle, including reclassification and postmarketing safety surveillance. The increasing availability of patient-generated health data is likely to further increase the utilization of RWE to aid decision making on nonprescription medicines.
| S-EPMC8742642 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Real-world evidence (RWE) is increasingly used to complement clinical trial data for regulatory decision-making and in certain cases utilized to establish the clinical effectiveness of a therapy. However, the use of RWE is not applicable for all regulatory submissions, and it can be challenging to identify appropriate use cases. An interactive tool was developed ("Decision Aid," https://sn.pub/TpDjZx ) to assist researchers, industry, and other stakeholders in identifying regulatory situations that can benefit from leveraging RWE by organizing precedent cases based on a given regulatory objective (new product approval, labeling expansion for new indication or additional clinical data, post-marketing requirement) and type of RWE study design (external control, observational study, pragmatic trial). Key success factors ensuring fit-for-purpose data and rigorous methods (e.g., clear endpoints, minimizing bias, data completeness) are also described. The tool allows the user to navigate through the precedent cases by selecting certain regulatory objectives and/or study designs. The Decision Aid supports regulatory activities in the RWE space and encourages further use of RWE in regulatory decision-making.
| S-EPMC9379219 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Aims: In countries where a randomized clinical trial (RCT) is difficult to perform, a real-world evidence (RWE) study with a design similar to an RCT may be an option for drug regulatory decision-making. In this study, the objective was to find out to what extent the safety of empagliflozin from the RWE study in Korea is different from the one in RCT by emulating the design of foreign RCT. The outcome covers various safety outcomes including cardiovascular safety. Methods: The EMPA-REG OUTCOME trial (NCT01131676) was selected for comparison. The inclusion/exclusion criteria and follow-up method for the RWE were matched to the comparison RCT. Major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) were used as a primary outcome and 15 other outcomes were also included for analysis. Result: We followed 23,126 matched patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (11,563 empagliflozin users and 11,563 sitagliptin users) for 2.7 years (median). Empagliflozin use was associated with a significantly decreased risk of MACEs [EMPA-REG DUPLICATE RWE: adjusted HR 0.87, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.79-0.96]. The predefined estimate agreement, regulatory agreement, and standardized difference for RCT duplication were achieved [EMPA-REG OUTCOME RCT: adjusted HR 0.86, 95% (CI) 0.74-0.99]. According to the predefined criteria for 15 outcomes, 10 outcomes were evaluated as good, and three as moderate. Conclusion: Our study results suggest that RWE in one country in comparison with an RCT has the potential for providing evidence for future regulatory decision-making in an environment where RCT could not be performed.
| S-EPMC9468970 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Real world evidence (RWE) and real-world data (RWD) are drawing ever-increasing attention in the pharmaceutical industry and drug regulatory authorities (DRAs) all over the world due to their paramount role in supporting drug development and regulatory decision making. However, there is little systematic documentary analysis about how RWE was integrated for the use by the DRAs in evaluating new treatment approaches and monitoring post-market safety. This study aimed to analyze and discuss the integration of RWE into regulatory decision-making process from the perspective of DRAs. Different development strategies to develop and adopt RWE by the DRAs in the US, Europe, and China were reviewed and compared, and the challenges encountered were discussed. It was found that different strategies on development of RWE were applied by FDA, EMA, and NMPA. The extent to which RWE was adopted in China was relatively limited compared to that in the US and EU, which was highly related to the national pharmaceutical environment and development stages. A better understanding of the overall goals, inputs, activities, outputs, and outcomes in developing RWE will help inform actions to harness RWD and leverage RWE for better health care decisions.
| S-EPMC8200400 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Data regarding chemotherapy options and benefits in older women with early triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) are limited. Our study aimed to assess the effects of adjuvant chemotherapy on recurrence-free survival (RFS), breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS), and overall survival (OS) rates in elderly TNBC patients. Patients aged ≥65 years diagnosed with stage I-III TNBC (except T1aN0) between 2010 and 2016 were retrospectively included. Multivariate Cox regression was performed to minimize bias. A total of 177 patients were included with a median age of 69 years (range, 65-86), almost all had a Charlson Comorbidity Index of 0-2, and 127 (71.8%) received chemotherapy. Patients who received chemotherapy were younger, had more advanced-stage disease and had better ECOG performance status (P<0.05). Among the 127 patients who were administered chemotherapy, 45 (35%) received taxane plus carboplatin, 36 (28%) received anthracycline-and-taxane-based regimens, and 23 (18%) received taxane-based regimens. The regimen options differed based on patient age and tumour stage (P<0.05). Nearly 80% of the patients completed ≥6 cycles of chemotherapy, and half had their dosage decreased. After adjustment for confounding factors, patients who received ≥6 cycles of chemotherapy were found to have improved RFS rates (hazard ratio [HR], 0.28; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.09-0.87; P=0.027), and receipt of chemotherapy (≥1 cycle) was associated with better BCSS (HR, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.04-0.97; P=0.046) and OS (HR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.08-0.87; P=0.029) rates. These results support the considering the risk for recurrence and performing individualized assessments when determining the appropriate chemotherapy approach for older women with early TNBC.
| S-EPMC9097590 | biostudies-literature
Project description:There is growing interest in regulatory use of randomized pragmatic trials and noninterventional real-world (RW) studies of effectiveness and safety, but there is no agreed-on framework for assessing when this type of evidence is sufficiently reliable. Rather than impose a clinical trial-like paradigm on RW evidence, like blinded treatments or complete, source-verified data, the framework for assessing the utility of RW evidence should be grounded in the context of specific study objectives, clinical events that are likely to be detected in routine care, and the extent to which systematic error (bias) is likely to impact effect estimation. Whether treatment is blinded should depend on how well the outcome can be measured objectively. Qualification of a data source should be based on (1) numbers of patients of interest available for study; (2) if "must-have" data are likely to be recorded, and if so, how and where; (3) the accessibility of systematic follow-up data for the time period of interest; and (4) the potential for systematic errors (bias) in data collection and the likely magnitude of any such bias. Accessible data may not be representative of an entire population, but still may provide reliable evidence about the experience of typical patients treated under conditions of conventional care. Similarly, RW data that falls short of optimal length of follow-up or study size may still be useful in terms of its ability to provide evidence for regulators for subgroups of special interest. Developing a framework to qualify RW evidence in the context of a particular study purpose and data asset will enable broader regulatory use of RW data for approval of new molecular entities and label changes. Reliable information about diverse populations and settings should also help us move closer to more affordable, effective health care.
| S-EPMC5944086 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundGlobally, there is increasing interest in the use of real-world data (RWD) and real-world evidence (RWE) to inform health technology assessment (HTA) and reimbursement decision-making. Using current practices and case studies shared by eleven health systems in Asia, a non-binding guidance that seeks to align practices for generating and using RWD/RWE for decision-making in Asia was developed by the REAL World Data In ASia for HEalth Technology Assessment in Reimbursement (REALISE) Working Group, addressing a current gap and needs among HTA users and generators.MethodsThe guidance document was developed over two face-to-face workshops, in addition to an online survey, a face-to-face interview and pragmatic search of literature. The specific focus was on what, where and how to collect RWD/ RWE.ResultsAll 11 REALISE member jurisdictions participated in the online survey and the first in-person workshop, 10 participated in the second in-person workshop, and 8 participated in the in-depth face-to-face interviews. The guidance document was iteratively reviewed by all working group members and the International Advisory Panel. There was substantial variation in: (a) sources and types of RWD being used in HTA, and (b) the relative importance and prioritization of RWE being used for policy-making. A list of national-level databases and other sources of RWD available in each country was compiled. A list of useful guidance on data collection, quality assurance and study design were also compiled.ConclusionThe REALISE guidance document serves to align the collection of better quality RWD and generation of reliable RWE to ultimately inform HTA in Asia.
| S-EPMC10461954 | biostudies-literature