Pharmaceutical Medicine最新文献

General managers (GMs) play a crucial role as enterprise leaders of the country affiliate of multi-national pharmaceutical companies, balancing needs, objectives and governance across all local functions. One such function, Medical Affairs, has undergone a significant evolution from a support function into a strategic partner and in some organizations a strategic leader supported by the increasing complexity of medications and a shift to more specialized medicines. Although the function has progressed significantly, there is opportunity to elevate Medical Affairs to another level, with GMs and business unit directors (BUDs) recommending increased business acumen, strategic approach, innovation and project management as competencies that could be further cultivated. Examining the current trends in the industry, including the increasing complexity of innovative medicines and patient journeys, a higher burden of evidence for the reimbursement of medicines, innovative data generation opportunities, the changing stakeholder engagement expectations and the focus on corporate reputation, Medical Affairs is positioned as a key to assist in navigating the organization through these complexities. The GM can help to foster the evolving role of Medical Affairs, encouraging lateral moves for broader enterprise mindset, imparting a culture of shared governance responsibilities across functions to encourage innovative thinking and nurture upcoming leaders by investing in training to take advantage of the above trends and deliver best patient and organizational outcomes now and in the future.

Background: Originator drug manufacturers use several strategies to delay generic competition in the USA, but it remains unclear whether this results in longer market exclusivity compared to other countries.

Objectives: We sought to understand how drug market exclusivity lengths vary between the USA and two comparable countries.

Methods: We focused on drugs approved within 2 years of each other in the USA, France, and Australia from 1995 to 2005, and we compared the lengths of exclusivity from marketing approval through first generic competition or June 2023 using Kaplan-Meier analyses.

Results: Among 165 drugs in common between the USA and France, the median length of exclusivity was slightly longer in France (15.0 years, interquartile range [IQR]: 13.0-19.6) than the USA (14.5 years, IQR: 11.7-17.6). Among 100 drugs in common between the USA and Australia, the median length of exclusivity was longer in Australia (16.3 years, IQR: 13.9-22.4) than in the USA (14.4 years, IQR: 12.0-17.1).

Conclusions: Market exclusivity lengths in the USA are not longer than in France and Australia. Potential reasons include the larger US market and incentives that offer transient high generic drug prices in the USA for manufacturers that successfully challenge originator market exclusivity.

Diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility (DEIA) are foundational principles for clinical trials and medical research. In rare diseases clinical research, where numbers of participants are already challenged by rarity itself, maximizing inclusion is of particular importance to clinical trial success, as well as ensuring the generalizability and relevance of the trial results to the people affected by these diseases. In this article, we review the medical and gray literature and cite case examples to provide insights into how DEIA can be proactively integrated into rare diseases clinical research. Here, we particularly focus on genetic diversity. While the rare diseases DEIA literature is nascent, it is accelerating as many patient advocacy groups, professional societies, training and educational organizations, researcher groups, and funders are setting intentional strategies to attain DEIA goals moving forward, and to establish metrics to ensure continued improvement. Successful examples in underserved and underrepresented populations are available that can serve as case studies upon which rare diseases clinical research programs can be built. Rare diseases have historically been innovation drivers in basic, translational, and clinical research, and ultimately, all populations benefit from data diversity in rare diseases populations that deliver novel insights and approaches to how clinical research can be performed.

Alcohol use disorder (AUD) is a debilitating disorder, yet currently approved pharmacotherapies to treat AUD are under-utilized. The three medications approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the indication of AUD are disulfiram, acamprosate, and naltrexone. The current landscape of pharmacotherapies for AUD suggests opportunities for improvement. Clinical trials investigating novel pharmacotherapies for AUD traditionally use abstinence-based drinking outcomes or no heavy drinking days as trial endpoints to determine the efficacy of pharmacotherapies. These outcomes are typically measured through patient self-report endorsements of their drinking. Apart from these traditional outcomes, there have been recent developments in novel endpoints for AUD pharmacotherapies. These novel endpoints include utilizing the World Health Organization (WHO) risk drinking level reductions to promote a harm-reduction endpoint rather than an abstinence-based endpoint. Additionally, in contrast to patient self-report measurements, biological markers of alcohol use may serve as objective endpoints in AUD pharmacotherapy trials. Lastly, the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) definition of recovery from AUD and patient-oriented outcomes offer new frameworks to consider endpoints associated with more than alcohol consumption itself, such as the provider-patient experiences with novel pharmacotherapies. These recent developments in new endpoints for AUD pharmacotherapies offer promising future opportunities for pharmacotherapy development, so long as validity and reliability measures are demonstrated for the endpoints. A greater breadth of endpoint utilization may better capture the complexity of AUD symptomatology.

Background: The Japanese biosimilar guideline requires that the sponsors conduct clinical studies such as comparative pharmacokinetic (PK), pharmacodynamic (PD), or efficacy studies. In each biosimilar development, the sponsors consider the clinical data package, and thus clinical data packages vary among biosimilar developments.

Objectives: The aim of this study was to elucidate the clinical data packages for the biosimilars approved in Japan. The details of clinical data packages and sample size for the regulatory approvals of biosimilars in Japan was reported.

Methods: We surveyed the clinical data packages and sample size based on the Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency (PMDA) website review reports between 2009 and 2023.

Results: Twenty-four biosimilars have been approved based on the comparative PK and efficacy studies, 10 biosimilars have been approved based on the comparative PK/PD study, and one biosimilar has been approved based on the comparative efficacy study. Regarding the sample size, comparative PK studies were conducted in healthy volunteers or patients for up to 300 cases, although the majority enrolled only 1-100 cases (68.1%, 32/47). Comparative PD studies enrolling 1-30, 31-60, and 61-90 cases totaled 4, 7, and 4 cases, respectively. Finally, comparative efficacy studies enrolling 1-300, 301-600, and 601-900 totaled 6, 10, and 11 cases, respectively. In particular, the oncology and rheumatology areas were the first and second disease areas recruiting 601-900 patients.

Conclusion: Large numbers of patients were enrolled to conduct a comparative efficacy study. Efficient biosimilar development should be considered on the basis of the accumulation of scientific understanding of comparable features of biosimilars and their development.

Introduction: Medical departments have evolved from a position of support to one of strategic leadership. The number of tasks and the complexity of interactions in which they are involved is increasing. However, the spectrum of their activity in the sector differs significantly from one company to another. Therefore, the aim of this study was to describe their situation within the pharmaceutical industry, analyzing the positions, functions, and profiles of their professionals.

Methods: This study consisted of an online survey containing 25 questions grouped into four blocks (structure, medical direction, training, and activities and responsibilities). Medical departments in the Spanish pharmaceutical industry of different sizes and scope were invited to participate. The survey took place in 2021, with a designated response period of three months. It is important to note that all responses collected during this time were treated as anonymous.

Results: Thirty companies participated. A total of 93.3% of respondents worked for an international laboratory, with a size of 0-5 or 11-20 people (20.7%). For 27.6% of the companies, the number of medical advisors per medical department was 1 or 4, with varying numbers of medical scientific liaisons (1, 6-10, and > 20). A total of 56.7%, 33.3%, and 6.7% indicated that the country manager, head of regional medical affairs, and head of global medical affairs, respectively, had a solid-line reporting relationship with the medical directorate. Medical directors were mostly graduates in medicine (86.2%) with a doctorate (34.5%), and medical managers were mainly graduates in medicine (77.8%) and pharmacy (66.7%).

Conclusions: This study reveals that respondents predominantly work in internationally focused laboratories, with professionals ranging from experienced medical directors to managers with 6-20 years of experience, each with distinct roles.

Children were often referred to as "therapeutic orphans" in the past due to different reasons such as ethical, regulatory, economic, scientific, etc., ones. They were exposed to avoidable risks while missing out on therapeutic advances. Pediatric patients have suffered from a lack of scientific and regulatory standards (e.g., proper drug testing, authorization of medicines for their use, etc.), although the pharmaceutical legislative framework, which ensures the high standards of safety, quality, and efficacy of medicinal products for use in adults, was developed primarily in response to past "drug disasters," mainly involving children. The adoption of pediatric regulatory initiatives first in the USA and then in Europe and other countries and regions has significantly changed the worldwide frameworks and permanently changed pediatric drug research and development. This article tries to give various perspectives with historical context, a review of the different challenges and opportunities as well as important stakeholders in pediatric drug development. The pediatric trial networks are probably the most important stakeholder that enables efficient patient recruitment, access to better resource utilization, and global collaboration of different stakeholders necessary for performing quality and well-designed clinical trials.

Introduction: Spontaneous reporting of adverse events (AEs) is a mainstay of pharmacovigilance, and an ongoing challenge is how to ensure that more high-quality reports are collected for comprehensive information provision. The Med Safety App, a smartphone-based application, was launched in Nigeria in November 2020 to provide an electronic platform for users to seamlessly report AEs. There has been a paucity of evidence on the use of this application or other mobile applications for reporting adverse drug reactions/AEs following immunization in the Nigerian environment.

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the trends in adverse event reporting before and after the introduction of the Med Safety App in Nigeria.

Methods: This was a retrospective, observational study using data from the VigiFlow database to compare adverse event reporting in Nigeria before and after the deployment of the Med Safety App. The baseline period was 1st April 2019 to 30th October 2020 and the comparison period was 1st November 2020 to 31st May 2022. We used Vigilance Hub, the back-end system for the Med Safety App, to extract data on App downloads and de-identified user statistics. Data were summarized using descriptive statistics, frequencies and proportions. Quality was assessed by assigning a completeness score to each individual case safety report. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to test for differences in medians between groups.

Results: Following deployment of the App, the Nigerian National Pharmacovigilance Centre recorded an increase in the total number of adverse event reports received in VigiFlow, from 2051 in the baseline period to 18,995 following deployment of the App, with 81.7% of those reported via the Med Safety App. There was a reduction in the proportion of paper-based reporting from 98.4 to 15.7% post-deployment, and direct reporting by consumers increased from 2.7 to 17.6%. Of the 15,526 reports submitted via the App, 15,111 (97.3%) had a completeness score above 70% and 6993 (45%) had a completeness score of 100%. The median completeness score of adverse event reports on the Med Safety App was 6 out of 7. On bivariate analysis using the Kruskal-Wallis test, there was an association between means of reporting and completeness score, and this association was significant, with a p value of 0.0001, which may reflect the validation rules that are applied within the App.

Conclusion: Deployment of the Med Safety App increased both the number and quality of adverse event reports; however, more awareness and capacity building are needed to strengthen and sustain reporting on the tool by all categories of healthcare professionals and consumers/patients.