支持FDA药物批准的证据质量趋势:来自文献综述的结果。

IF 3.3 3区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law Pub Date : 2022-12-01 DOI:10.1215/03616878-10041093
Beatrice L Brown, Mayookha Mitra-Majumdar, Krysten Joyce, Murray Ross, Catherine Pham, Jonathan J Darrow, Jerry Avorn, Aaron S Kesselheim
{"title":"支持FDA药物批准的证据质量趋势:来自文献综述的结果。","authors":"Beatrice L Brown,&nbsp;Mayookha Mitra-Majumdar,&nbsp;Krysten Joyce,&nbsp;Murray Ross,&nbsp;Catherine Pham,&nbsp;Jonathan J Darrow,&nbsp;Jerry Avorn,&nbsp;Aaron S Kesselheim","doi":"10.1215/03616878-10041093","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Context: </strong>New drug approvals in the United States must be supported by substantial evidence from \"adequate and well-controlled\" trials. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has flexibility in how it applies this standard.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The authors conducted a systematic literature review of studies evaluating the design and outcomes of the key trials supporting new drug approvals in the United States. They extracted data on the trial characteristics, endpoint types, and expedited regulatory pathways.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Among 48 publications eligible for inclusion, 30 covered trial characteristics, 23 covered surrogate measures, and 30 covered regulatory pathways. Trends point toward less frequent randomization, double-blinding, and active controls, with variation by drug type and indication. Surrogate measures are becoming more common but are not consistently well correlated with clinical outcomes. Drugs approved through expedited regulatory pathways often have less rigorous trial design characteristics.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The characteristics of trials used to approve new drugs have evolved over the past two decades along with greater use of expedited regulatory pathways and changes in the nature of drugs being evaluated. While flexibility in regulatory standards is important, policy changes can emphasize high-quality data collection before or after FDA approval.</p>","PeriodicalId":54812,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law","volume":"47 6","pages":"649-672"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Trends in the Quality of Evidence Supporting FDA Drug Approvals: Results from a Literature Review.\",\"authors\":\"Beatrice L Brown,&nbsp;Mayookha Mitra-Majumdar,&nbsp;Krysten Joyce,&nbsp;Murray Ross,&nbsp;Catherine Pham,&nbsp;Jonathan J Darrow,&nbsp;Jerry Avorn,&nbsp;Aaron S Kesselheim\",\"doi\":\"10.1215/03616878-10041093\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Context: </strong>New drug approvals in the United States must be supported by substantial evidence from \\\"adequate and well-controlled\\\" trials. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has flexibility in how it applies this standard.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The authors conducted a systematic literature review of studies evaluating the design and outcomes of the key trials supporting new drug approvals in the United States. They extracted data on the trial characteristics, endpoint types, and expedited regulatory pathways.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Among 48 publications eligible for inclusion, 30 covered trial characteristics, 23 covered surrogate measures, and 30 covered regulatory pathways. Trends point toward less frequent randomization, double-blinding, and active controls, with variation by drug type and indication. Surrogate measures are becoming more common but are not consistently well correlated with clinical outcomes. Drugs approved through expedited regulatory pathways often have less rigorous trial design characteristics.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The characteristics of trials used to approve new drugs have evolved over the past two decades along with greater use of expedited regulatory pathways and changes in the nature of drugs being evaluated. While flexibility in regulatory standards is important, policy changes can emphasize high-quality data collection before or after FDA approval.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54812,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law\",\"volume\":\"47 6\",\"pages\":\"649-672\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1215/03616878-10041093\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1215/03616878-10041093","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

背景:在美国,新药的批准必须得到“充分和良好控制”试验的大量证据的支持。食品和药物管理局(FDA)在如何应用该标准方面具有灵活性。方法:作者对支持美国新药批准的关键试验的设计和结果进行了系统的文献综述。他们提取了有关试验特征、终点类型和加速监管途径的数据。结果:在48篇符合纳入条件的出版物中,30篇涉及试验特征,23篇涉及替代措施,30篇涉及调节途径。趋势指向较少的随机化、双盲和主动对照,随药物类型和适应症而变化。替代措施正变得越来越普遍,但与临床结果的相关性并不总是很好。通过快速监管途径获得批准的药物通常没有那么严格的试验设计特征。结论:在过去的二十年中,随着快速监管途径的广泛使用和被评估药物性质的变化,用于批准新药的试验的特点已经发生了变化。虽然监管标准的灵活性很重要,但政策变化可以强调在FDA批准之前或之后的高质量数据收集。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Trends in the Quality of Evidence Supporting FDA Drug Approvals: Results from a Literature Review.

Context: New drug approvals in the United States must be supported by substantial evidence from "adequate and well-controlled" trials. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has flexibility in how it applies this standard.

Methods: The authors conducted a systematic literature review of studies evaluating the design and outcomes of the key trials supporting new drug approvals in the United States. They extracted data on the trial characteristics, endpoint types, and expedited regulatory pathways.

Findings: Among 48 publications eligible for inclusion, 30 covered trial characteristics, 23 covered surrogate measures, and 30 covered regulatory pathways. Trends point toward less frequent randomization, double-blinding, and active controls, with variation by drug type and indication. Surrogate measures are becoming more common but are not consistently well correlated with clinical outcomes. Drugs approved through expedited regulatory pathways often have less rigorous trial design characteristics.

Conclusions: The characteristics of trials used to approve new drugs have evolved over the past two decades along with greater use of expedited regulatory pathways and changes in the nature of drugs being evaluated. While flexibility in regulatory standards is important, policy changes can emphasize high-quality data collection before or after FDA approval.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.30
自引率
7.10%
发文量
46
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: A leading journal in its field, and the primary source of communication across the many disciplines it serves, the Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law focuses on the initiation, formulation, and implementation of health policy and analyzes the relations between government and health—past, present, and future.
期刊最新文献
Explaining Political Differences in Attitudes to Vaccines in France: Partisan Cues, Disenchantment with Politics, and Political Sophistication. Implementing Primary Care Reform in France: Bargaining, Policy Adaptation, and the Maisons de Santé Pluriprofessionnelles. Policy Feedback and the Politics of Childhood Vaccine Mandates: Conflict and Change in California, 2012-2019. Regime Type and Data Manipulation: Evidence from the COVID-19 Pandemic. Why Some Nonelderly Adult Medicaid Enrollees Appear Ineligible Based on Their Annual Income.
×
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