Off-label prescription of medicines: what do we know about the legislation in EU member states?

Renske Caminada, Max Polano, A. Pasmooij, V. Stoyanova-Beninska
{"title":"Off-label prescription of medicines: what do we know about the legislation in EU member states?","authors":"Renske Caminada, Max Polano, A. Pasmooij, V. Stoyanova-Beninska","doi":"10.20517/rdodj.2021.04","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim: Off-label prescription is not regulated on the European Union (EU) level and therefore not harmonised in the EU Member States (MS). Despite this, the use of medicines outside of the drug label occurs in clinical practice, and it can be included in treatment guidelines and/or reimbursed in some cases. It is, however, currently not clear to what extent off-label use can be included in regulatory discussions at a European level at the different committees at the European Medicines Agency. In this article, we provide an overview of the current legislation on MS level regarding off-label prescription in order to support EU regulatory discussions. Methods: Relevant national legislation regarding off-label prescription from MS was identified by distributing a questionnaire to EMACOLEX. Case law was excluded. The identified categorical elements and prerequisites in the national legislation were then categorised. Subsequently, a comparison was made to the five Good Off-Label Use Practice (GOLUP) principles. Results: Based on the obtained responses from 10 MS, we observed a large heterogeneity in the legislation of MS regarding off-label prescription. Five (out of 10) MS regulate off-label prescription explicitly and seven (out of 10) MS have prerequisites. One or more prerequisites per MS were reflected in the GOLUP principles as formulated in 2017. Conclusion: The main contribution of this work is to flag that off-label prescription actually needs to be well defined and understood before it can be appropriately taken into consideration in regulatory discussions. There is a heterogeneity in legislation regarding off-label prescription in the investigated MS, which may lead to different perspectives. A common understanding of the concept and more alignment in off-label prescription practices and their regulation at MS level may contribute to further regulatory discussions.","PeriodicalId":74638,"journal":{"name":"Rare disease and orphan drugs journal","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Rare disease and orphan drugs journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20517/rdodj.2021.04","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Aim: Off-label prescription is not regulated on the European Union (EU) level and therefore not harmonised in the EU Member States (MS). Despite this, the use of medicines outside of the drug label occurs in clinical practice, and it can be included in treatment guidelines and/or reimbursed in some cases. It is, however, currently not clear to what extent off-label use can be included in regulatory discussions at a European level at the different committees at the European Medicines Agency. In this article, we provide an overview of the current legislation on MS level regarding off-label prescription in order to support EU regulatory discussions. Methods: Relevant national legislation regarding off-label prescription from MS was identified by distributing a questionnaire to EMACOLEX. Case law was excluded. The identified categorical elements and prerequisites in the national legislation were then categorised. Subsequently, a comparison was made to the five Good Off-Label Use Practice (GOLUP) principles. Results: Based on the obtained responses from 10 MS, we observed a large heterogeneity in the legislation of MS regarding off-label prescription. Five (out of 10) MS regulate off-label prescription explicitly and seven (out of 10) MS have prerequisites. One or more prerequisites per MS were reflected in the GOLUP principles as formulated in 2017. Conclusion: The main contribution of this work is to flag that off-label prescription actually needs to be well defined and understood before it can be appropriately taken into consideration in regulatory discussions. There is a heterogeneity in legislation regarding off-label prescription in the investigated MS, which may lead to different perspectives. A common understanding of the concept and more alignment in off-label prescription practices and their regulation at MS level may contribute to further regulatory discussions.
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
药物说明书外处方:我们对欧盟成员国的立法了解多少?
目的:标签外处方未在欧盟(EU)层面进行监管,因此未在欧盟成员国(MS)进行协调。尽管如此,在临床实践中仍会出现使用药品标签以外的药物的情况,并且在某些情况下可以将其纳入治疗指南和/或报销。然而,目前尚不清楚在欧洲层面上,在欧洲药品管理局的不同委员会中,在多大程度上可以将标签外使用纳入监管讨论。在本文中,我们概述了MS层面关于标签外处方的现行立法,以支持欧盟监管讨论。方法:通过向EMACOLEX发放调查问卷,了解国家有关MS超说明书处方的相关立法。判例法被排除在外。然后对国家立法中确定的分类要素和先决条件进行分类。随后,对五个良好的标签外使用实践(GOLUP)原则进行了比较。结果:根据获得的10个MS的反馈,我们观察到MS关于超说明书处方的立法存在很大的异质性。10个质谱中有5个明确规定了说明书外处方,7个有先决条件。2017年制定的GOLUP原则反映了每个MS的一个或多个先决条件。结论:这项工作的主要贡献是表明,在监管讨论中适当考虑超说明书处方之前,实际上需要对其进行良好的定义和理解。在被调查的MS中,关于超说明书处方的立法存在异质性,这可能导致不同的观点。对概念的共同理解和标签外处方实践及其在MS层面的监管的更多一致性可能有助于进一步的监管讨论。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Fabry nephropathy: a treatable cause of chronic kidney disease Gene therapy for Dravet syndrome: promises and impact on disease trigger and secondary modifications Neuropathy and pain in Fabry disease The division of rare diseases research innovation at the national center for advancing translational sciences, NIH: mission, history, and current research activities Long-term treatment with insulin-like growth factor-1 in Phelan-McDermid syndrome: a case report
×
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