PP146 Seeing Eye-To-Eye on Real-World Evidence: Are Guidance from Japan and China Consistent with Recommendations from REALISE in Asia?

IF 2.6 4区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care Pub Date : 2023-12-14 DOI:10.1017/s0266462323002507
Yan Ran Wee, Natsumi Fujita, Jennifer S Evans
{"title":"PP146 Seeing Eye-To-Eye on Real-World Evidence: Are Guidance from Japan and China Consistent with Recommendations from REALISE in Asia?","authors":"Yan Ran Wee, Natsumi Fujita, Jennifer S Evans","doi":"10.1017/s0266462323002507","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<span>Introduction</span><p>The REAL World Data (RWD) In Asia for Health Technology Assessment (HTA) guidance was developed by a regional working group to facilitate the increasing acceptance of real-world evidence (RWE) in Asia. We compared the consistency of REALISE against guidance from Japan and China.</p><span>Methods</span><p>Country-specific guidance for RWE/RWD use in pharmaceutical development were identified in May 2022 through governmental websites, with validation searches via Google. Sections from local guidance were mapped onto REALISE and categorized as “agree”, “mixed”, “disagree” or “missing” based on coverage and consistency.</p><span>Results</span><p>Five Japanese and three Chinese documents were mapped. Most sections in Chinese guidance (77%) and 36 percent of sections in Japanese guidance were tagged “agree” or “mixed”, with general alignment on definitions and good practice considerations (study design, accountability); however, 63 percent of Japanese sections were tagged “missing” from REALISE. As local documents took the regulatory perspective, they lacked REALISE’s discussion of translating RWD to RWE for HTA/economic evaluations specifically. Local guidance focused on practicalities of RWD collection in local contexts, including descriptions of specific actions (e.g., evaluating RWD sources, ensuring data security) rather than overarching principles described in REALISE; specifically, Japanese guidance described how to access and analyze databases/registries, reflecting Japan’s landscape of robust sources of national healthcare data, but lacked discussion of other RWE study types, data sources and specialized analytical methods. While Chinese guidance had a broader view of RWD types (more similar to REALISE), they also contained discussions on pharmacovigilance and omics data, communication with regulatory bodies, and incorporation of RWE into the approval pathway for traditional Chinese medicines.</p><span>Conclusions</span><p>Despite differing purposes (with no RWE guidance from local HTA bodies), local and regional guidance align on general principles/good practice in generating/using RWE, providing common ground for increasing usage of RWE in HTA in Asia.</p>","PeriodicalId":14467,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0266462323002507","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

The REAL World Data (RWD) In Asia for Health Technology Assessment (HTA) guidance was developed by a regional working group to facilitate the increasing acceptance of real-world evidence (RWE) in Asia. We compared the consistency of REALISE against guidance from Japan and China.

Methods

Country-specific guidance for RWE/RWD use in pharmaceutical development were identified in May 2022 through governmental websites, with validation searches via Google. Sections from local guidance were mapped onto REALISE and categorized as “agree”, “mixed”, “disagree” or “missing” based on coverage and consistency.

Results

Five Japanese and three Chinese documents were mapped. Most sections in Chinese guidance (77%) and 36 percent of sections in Japanese guidance were tagged “agree” or “mixed”, with general alignment on definitions and good practice considerations (study design, accountability); however, 63 percent of Japanese sections were tagged “missing” from REALISE. As local documents took the regulatory perspective, they lacked REALISE’s discussion of translating RWD to RWE for HTA/economic evaluations specifically. Local guidance focused on practicalities of RWD collection in local contexts, including descriptions of specific actions (e.g., evaluating RWD sources, ensuring data security) rather than overarching principles described in REALISE; specifically, Japanese guidance described how to access and analyze databases/registries, reflecting Japan’s landscape of robust sources of national healthcare data, but lacked discussion of other RWE study types, data sources and specialized analytical methods. While Chinese guidance had a broader view of RWD types (more similar to REALISE), they also contained discussions on pharmacovigilance and omics data, communication with regulatory bodies, and incorporation of RWE into the approval pathway for traditional Chinese medicines.

Conclusions

Despite differing purposes (with no RWE guidance from local HTA bodies), local and regional guidance align on general principles/good practice in generating/using RWE, providing common ground for increasing usage of RWE in HTA in Asia.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
PP146 在现实世界的证据上看齐:日本和中国的指导与亚洲 REALISE 的建议是否一致?
亚洲卫生技术评估(HTA)的真实世界数据(RWD)指南是由一个区域工作组制定的,旨在促进亚洲对真实世界证据(RWE)的日益接受。我们将realize的一致性与日本和中国的指引进行了比较。方法:RWE/RWD在药物开发中使用的国别指南于2022年5月通过政府网站确定,并通过谷歌进行验证搜索。来自当地指南的部分被映射到realize,并根据覆盖范围和一致性被分类为“同意”、“混合”、“不同意”或“缺失”。结果绘制了5份日文文献和3份中文文献。中文指南中的大部分章节(77%)和日文指南中36%的章节被标记为“同意”或“混合”,在定义和良好实践考虑(研究设计,问责制)方面大致一致;然而,63%的日本部分在realize中被标记为“缺失”。由于地方文件是从监管的角度出发的,因此它们缺乏realize对将RWD转换为RWE进行HTA/经济评估的具体讨论。地方指南侧重于在当地情况下RWD收集的实用性,包括具体行动的描述(例如,评估RWD来源,确保数据安全),而不是实现中描述的总体原则;具体而言,日本的指南描述了如何访问和分析数据库/注册表,反映了日本拥有强大的国家医疗保健数据来源的情况,但缺乏对其他RWE研究类型、数据源和专门分析方法的讨论。虽然中国的指南对RWD类型有更广泛的看法(更类似于realize),但它们也包括对药物警戒和组学数据的讨论,与监管机构的沟通,以及将RWE纳入中药的审批途径。尽管目的不同(没有来自当地HTA机构的RWE指导),但地方和区域指导在产生/使用RWE方面的一般原则/良好做法是一致的,为亚洲HTA中增加RWE的使用提供了共同点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
15.60%
发文量
116
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care serves as a forum for the wide range of health policy makers and professionals interested in the economic, social, ethical, medical and public health implications of health technology. It covers the development, evaluation, diffusion and use of health technology, as well as its impact on the organization and management of health care systems and public health. In addition to general essays and research reports, regular columns on technology assessment reports and thematic sections are published.
期刊最新文献
Development of an MCDA Framework for Rare Disease Reimbursement Prioritization in Malaysia. Experiences of patient organizations' involvement in medicine appraisal and reimbursement processes in Finland - a qualitative study. PP78 Real-World Trends And Medical Costs Of Stroke After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation In Korea: A Nationwide, Population-Based Study Can requests for real-world evidence by the French HTA body be planned? An exhaustive retrospective case-control study of medicinal products appraisals from 2016 to 2021. A systematic review of the cost and cost-effectiveness of immunoglobulin treatment in patients with hematological malignancies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1