Search

European pharmaceutical companies have a legal requirement to provide non-promotional Medical Information (MI) services to support healthcare professionals (HCPs) who are using their medicinal products. While the industry has self-regulating bodies with established Codes of Practice, these mainly focus on promotional messaging and commercial activities. In the absence of similar frameworks for MI, such services struggle to understand how to meet HCP digital expectations, often in fear of breaching the promotional codes. This is limiting access to the wealth of non-promotional patient-focussed information held within the industry. Meanwhile, a large volume of unregulated, low-quality information can be readily found on the internet. To understand the current status, the Medical Information Leaders in Europe (MILE) industry association performed a benchmarking survey which explored the online MI service provision of 13 mid-large pharmaceutical companies across Europe. This highlighted a great diversity in approach in terms of geographical coverage and content. Visibility and access for HCPs is complex, compromising online engagement and website utilisation. This MILE position paper highlights the critical need to establish a clear governance model, which empowers pharmaceutical company MI functions to provide unbranded, non-promotional, medicinal product information sources to support HCP online information needs. It is essential to build confidence, transparency and trust by establishing a practical quality framework with principles and standards for online MI services for HCPs., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

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., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG.)

Background: Additional risk minimization measures (aRMMs) are required for some pharmaceutical products when routine risk minimization measures (i.e., product labeling) are deemed insufficient. Measures often include educational materials, such as paper brochures, leaflets, and/or alert cards that provide information to healthcare professionals and patients on the key risks associated with a product and risk minimization actions to take should particular signs or symptoms arise. Paper-based educational aRMMs have several limitations. They do not present information in an interactive manner, and their update and distribution can be costly and often complex. Measuring how effective they are in achieving their aims can also be difficult. Digital methods offer design and delivery flexibility, easier updating processes, opportunities to increase engagement with important information, as well possibilities for tracking distribution, receipt, and potentially understanding of the materials. Pharmaceutical companies have started to look to digital methods as an option for educational aRMMs, alongside paper materials. Objectives: Research into healthcare professionals and patient needs and preferences, as well as the general acceptability of digital educational options is needed to establish a baseline. This was an exploratory study intended to provide initial insights on the acceptability of digital aRMMs and to inform future research directions. Methods: Digital concepts for educational aRMMs, one for healthcare professionals and one for patients, were evaluated with 30 healthcare professionals and 20 patients in six countries through 1:1 Zoom calls, with responses recorded in a structured Qualtrics-based survey. Criteria for selecting the six countries included local familiarity with aRMMs as well as interest in and capability to deliver a potential digital aRMM program by the sponsoring company's affiliate teams. Of the healthcare professionals, 19 were rheumatologists and 11 were dermatologists. 16 patients had rheumatologic (rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis) conditions and four had atopic dermatitis. These conditions were chosen as they aligned to potential therapeutic areas where the sponsoring company may have the opportunity to use a digital aRMM. Participants were given an overview of the concept as well as the opportunity to interact with it directly via the "control screen" function in Zoom before questions were posed. Results: The results demonstrated that the majority of healthcare professionals (87%) and all patients interviewed would prefer website-based or app-based delivery, respectively, of aRMM information instead of, or alongside traditional paper-based approaches, with only 13% of healthcare professionals and no patients expressing a preference for paper-only communication. Conclusions: Given new options offered by digital technology, its widespread use in many fields, and the importance of patient safety as a topic, there is an imperative for pharmaceutical companies and regulators to work together to establish a way forward for the use of digital options for aRMMs. This study is limited in its generalizability but offers some ideas for future research directions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Decentralised clinical trials (DCTs) encompass various terms such as virtual, home-based, remote and siteless trials. The objectives of DCTs are to enhance the ease of participation for patients in clinical trials by minimising or removing the necessity for trial subjects to travel to the trial sites. This approach has been shown to reduce drop-out rates, increase study effectiveness and ultimately get life-altering drugs to market faster-saving sponsors billions. At the outset, DCTs deploy a wide range of digital technologies to collect safety and efficacy data from study participants, providing study treatments and performing investigations from the comfort of the patient's own home. The aim of decentralised trials includes patient centricity, enhanced efficacy in clinical trial conduct and generating real-world data. This is done by not only making it convenient for the patient to participate in the trial execution, but also involving them from the planning stage and taking their inputs during designing of trials and consenting documentation, understanding their treatment requirements and designing the studies accordingly. Various regulatory authorities have published guidelines governing DCT principles, especially after the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) experience of undertaking multicentric clinical trials. Both United States Food and Drug Administration (USFDA) and European Medicines Agency (EMA) have newer, recently updated guidelines to capture this growing reality to undertake clinical trials using patient technology or patient-centric technologies. Other regulatory agencies are accepting data generated using decentralised and patient-centric technologies and making an effort to include elements of decentralised trials in their regulatory guidelines. Decentralised trials follow a hybrid approach to have a balanced mix of remote and in-person data collection and trial procedures. Decentralised and patient-centric approaches are the future of any organisation for the conduct of clinical trials. Globally, all sponsor pharmaceutical companies must start undertaking drug development and clinical trials using a decentralised approach while keeping patient centricity in mind., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG.)