适应症变更对欧盟联合临床评估范围界定的影响:问题的规模及如何解决。

IF 2.6 4区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care Pub Date : 2024-11-25 DOI:10.1017/S0266462324004641
Inka Heikkinen, Melinda Goodall, Natalie Steck, Maria Poulakou, Katherine Piso
{"title":"适应症变更对欧盟联合临床评估范围界定的影响:问题的规模及如何解决。","authors":"Inka Heikkinen, Melinda Goodall, Natalie Steck, Maria Poulakou, Katherine Piso","doi":"10.1017/S0266462324004641","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The European Union Joint Clinical Assessment (JCA) process aligns with the regulatory process to promote faster patient access. The PICO (population, intervention, comparator, and outcome) scoping for the JCA must occur before the regulatory process concludes. The risk of indication change during this period is one of the concerns for the success of the JCA process. We investigated the frequency and type of changes that are made to proposed indications and examined how such changes could impact the PICO scoping for JCA.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Twenty-seven recently approved oncology and 15 Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products (ATMP) products were included. Observed indication changes were categorized into editorial or population changes population changes were graded based on the anticipated impact on JCA scope depending on their nature.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The majority of products had only editorial changes between proposed and approved indications (67 percent). Once amended, it was common for the indicated population to be narrowed, and rare for it to be broadened. The most common change observed was the shift to a later treatment line. The greatest risk for PICO rescoping would be when new populations would have been added, or new subpopulations or subgroups would have been omitted from the initial scope.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The impact on JCA scope depends on the proposed indication wording and how the PICO scoping would have been conducted. Rescoping warrants a considered decision, and to mitigate the risk of delays, dialogue between the assessors and the developer is recommended for informed decision-making.</p>","PeriodicalId":14467,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care","volume":"40 1","pages":"e62"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Impact of indication changes on scoping for European Union Joint Clinical Assessment: scale of the problem and how to address it.\",\"authors\":\"Inka Heikkinen, Melinda Goodall, Natalie Steck, Maria Poulakou, Katherine Piso\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/S0266462324004641\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The European Union Joint Clinical Assessment (JCA) process aligns with the regulatory process to promote faster patient access. The PICO (population, intervention, comparator, and outcome) scoping for the JCA must occur before the regulatory process concludes. The risk of indication change during this period is one of the concerns for the success of the JCA process. We investigated the frequency and type of changes that are made to proposed indications and examined how such changes could impact the PICO scoping for JCA.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Twenty-seven recently approved oncology and 15 Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products (ATMP) products were included. Observed indication changes were categorized into editorial or population changes population changes were graded based on the anticipated impact on JCA scope depending on their nature.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The majority of products had only editorial changes between proposed and approved indications (67 percent). Once amended, it was common for the indicated population to be narrowed, and rare for it to be broadened. The most common change observed was the shift to a later treatment line. The greatest risk for PICO rescoping would be when new populations would have been added, or new subpopulations or subgroups would have been omitted from the initial scope.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The impact on JCA scope depends on the proposed indication wording and how the PICO scoping would have been conducted. Rescoping warrants a considered decision, and to mitigate the risk of delays, dialogue between the assessors and the developer is recommended for informed decision-making.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14467,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care\",\"volume\":\"40 1\",\"pages\":\"e62\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-25\",\"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/S0266462324004641\",\"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}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266462324004641","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

摘要

目标:欧盟联合临床评估 (JCA) 流程与监管流程保持一致,以促进患者更快地获得治疗。联合临床评估的 PICO(人群、干预、比较者和结果)范围界定必须在监管流程结束之前进行。在此期间,适应症变更的风险是 JCA 流程成功与否的关注点之一。我们调查了拟议适应症变更的频率和类型,并研究了此类变更会如何影响 JCA 的 PICO 范围界定:方法:纳入了最近批准的 27 种肿瘤药物和 15 种先进治疗药物 (ATMP) 产品。观察到的适应症变更分为编辑变更和人群变更,人群变更根据其性质对 JCA 范围的预期影响进行分级:结果:大多数产品(67%)在建议适应症和批准适应症之间仅有编辑上的变更。一旦修改,适应症人群缩小的情况很常见,扩大的情况很少见。最常见的修改是转到较后的治疗线。PICO 重新调整的最大风险是增加了新的人群,或从最初的范围中遗漏了新的亚人群或亚组:结论:对 JCA 范围的影响取决于建议的适应症措辞以及 PICO 范围界定的方式。重新范围界定需要经过深思熟虑才能做出决定,为降低延误风险,建议评估者与开发者进行对话,以便做出知情决策。
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
Impact of indication changes on scoping for European Union Joint Clinical Assessment: scale of the problem and how to address it.

Objectives: The European Union Joint Clinical Assessment (JCA) process aligns with the regulatory process to promote faster patient access. The PICO (population, intervention, comparator, and outcome) scoping for the JCA must occur before the regulatory process concludes. The risk of indication change during this period is one of the concerns for the success of the JCA process. We investigated the frequency and type of changes that are made to proposed indications and examined how such changes could impact the PICO scoping for JCA.

Methods: Twenty-seven recently approved oncology and 15 Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products (ATMP) products were included. Observed indication changes were categorized into editorial or population changes population changes were graded based on the anticipated impact on JCA scope depending on their nature.

Results: The majority of products had only editorial changes between proposed and approved indications (67 percent). Once amended, it was common for the indicated population to be narrowed, and rare for it to be broadened. The most common change observed was the shift to a later treatment line. The greatest risk for PICO rescoping would be when new populations would have been added, or new subpopulations or subgroups would have been omitted from the initial scope.

Conclusion: The impact on JCA scope depends on the proposed indication wording and how the PICO scoping would have been conducted. Rescoping warrants a considered decision, and to mitigate the risk of delays, dialogue between the assessors and the developer is recommended for informed decision-making.

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
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
HTA RESPONSIVENESS TO TODAY'S CHALLENGES TO HEALTH SYSTEMS: A RESPONSIBLE INNOVATION IN HEALTH PERSPECTIVE. Standards for the Conduct and Reporting of Health Technology Assessments: Ghana Reference Case of HTA and Economic Evaluations. Health technology assessment capacity to support Zambia's health benefits package reform policy. Value and Implementation of Patient and Public Involvement and Engagement in Health Technology Assessment for Japan: implications from systematic searches. PERCEPTION OF NON-LAYPERSON ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBERS ON THE APPLICATION OF A DISCRETE CHOICE EXPERIMENT INSTRUMENT TO PATIENTS AND ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBERS: A QUALITATIVE STUDY.
×
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