Search

As the first biologics produced by recombinant deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) technology were approved in the late 1980s and consequently the exclusive marketing rights of most of these biological medicinal products have expired or will expire very shortly, it is quite evident that biosimilars are being developed and marketed in developed as well as developing countries in line with these expiries. Hence, there is an explosion of published papers and scientific programs on biological medicinal products and biosimilar insulins in the last decade or so. Each of these papers or scientific programs generated more questions than providing clinically useful answers. The specific aim of the medical literature or scientific programs were blurred due to lot of attention (created by the innovators) directed towards confusing terminologies, past mishaps with biosimilars (in the era with the absence of regulatory guidelines for biosimilars) diverting our attention from the matters relevant to clinicians and patients. One of the principle reason behind this phenomenon has been our poor understanding of the manufacturing process, regulatory pathways, and study endpoints involved in developing a biosimilar in the present era. This drawback resulted in a nonsystematic approach in analyzing the biosimilars and apparently resulting in confusion. This review attempts at demystifying certain facets of frequently encountered information on biosimilars and acquire a personal understanding on the same, rather than depending on conflicting versions floated at different continuing medical educations (CMEs) and Diabetes Congresses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Predictive toxicology plays an integral role in determining the toxicological profiles of chemicals for safety assessment. Vitamin D is an essential vitamin for the regulation of calcium absorption and homeostasis, as well as the treatment and prevention of several diseases such as rickets and osteomalacia. According to European Medicines Agency (EMA) Guideline on setting health-based exposure limits for use in risk identification in the manufacturing of different medicinal products in shared facilities, permitted daily exposure (PDE) calculation for active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) should be done by the medicinal product producers. PDE calculation is mainly based on critical toxicological endpoints such as repeated dose toxicity, genotoxicity, carcinogenicity, developmental and reproductive toxicity, and hypersensitivity potential. During this procedure, critical toxicological endpoints data of an API can be used to predict the PDE of another API that has a similar chemical structure. In the present paper, human toxicological endpoints of vitamin D2, D3, and their metabolites were evaluated and afterwards the data gaps in the toxicological endpoints were filled by forming a category. The read-across was justified by the structural and metabolic similarities. Molecular similarity and mechanistic relevance were found to be substantial, resulting in low uncertainty. The untested vitamin D analogs within the category can be read across with confidence to complete the data gaps related to the human health endpoints. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The new In Vitro Diagnostic Regulation (EU) 2017/746 (IVDR) introduces important changes in the EU legal framework for companion diagnostics (CDx), including a new risk‐based classification system for in vitro diagnostic tests (IVDs), a first legal definition for CDx and enhanced involvement of notified bodies in the conformity assessment and certification process of CDx. The IVDR also establishes an important link between the assessment of a CDx and the corresponding medicinal product by requiring the notified body to seek a scientific opinion from the medicines regulator on the suitability of the CDx for use with the concerned medicinal product(s) before issuing an IVD certificate. Whereas the IVDR aims at establishing a robust regulatory framework for IVDs, it is also associated with several challenges, such as insufficient capacity of notified bodies and readiness of manufacturers. To ensure timely access for patients to essential IVDs, a progressive roll‐out for this new legislation has been introduced. In addition, the new consultation process for CDx requires increased collaboration and alignment of assessments performed by the different stakeholders involved in this process. The European Medicines Agency (EMA) and notified bodies are currently building experience based on the first CDx consultation procedures that have been submitted from January 2022 onward. In the current article, we describe the new European regulatory framework for certification of CDx and highlight several challenges for medicine and CDx co‐development. In addition, we briefly touch upon the interplay between the Clinical Trial Regulation (EU) No. 536/2014 (CTR) and the IVDR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

One year since the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic, rapid response measures have been implemented internationally to mitigate the spread of the virus. Following rapid and successful pre-clinical and human trials, several vaccines have been authorised for use across Europe through the European Medicines Agency and national regulatory authorities. Clinical trials have shown promising results including important reductions in disease severity, hospitalisation and mortality. In order to maximise the public health benefit of available vaccines, there is a pressing need to vaccinate a large proportion of the population. Internationally, this has prompted coordination of existing services at enormous scale, and development and implementation of novel vaccination strategies to ensure maximum inoculation over the shortest possible timeframe. Pharmacists are being promoted as healthcare professionals that enhance roll-out of COVID-19 vaccination programmes. This paper aims to summarise current policy and practice in relation to pharmacists' involvement in COVID-19 vaccination in 13 countries across Europe. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction. Currently, nearly 23,000 cases of lung cancer are diagnosed in Poland annually, of which 5% are cases with rearrangements in the ALK gene. In recent years, tremendous progress has been made in understanding the genetic makeup of this type of cancer, which has enabled the use of new therapies, in particular, molecularly targeted drugs. Crizotinib is the first oral small molecule inhibitor of ALK, MET and ROS1 receptor tyrosine Kinases approved by the European Medicines Agency(EMA). Case report. The paper presents the case of a 62-year-old patient diagnosed with non-small cell lung cancer with rearrangement in the ALK gene in stage IV of the disease. The patient was qualified for treatment with crizotinib under the B6 drug programme. Treatment started in May 2019. During treatment, assessment was made at 3 control points, where the first and second showed a partial response according to the RECIST 1.1 scale; in the next assessment, the response was maintained in the form of disease stabilization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of a non-inferiority trial is to assert the efficacy of an experimental treatment compared with a reference treatment by showing that the experimental treatment retains a substantial proportion of the efficacy of the reference treatment. Statistical methods have been developed to test multiple experimental treatments in three-arm non-inferiority trials. In this paper, we report the development of procedures that simultaneously test the non-inferiority and the superiority of experimental treatments after the assay sensitivity has been established. The advantage of the proposed test procedures is the additional ability to identify superior treatments while retaining an non-inferiority testing power comparable to that of existing testing procedures. Single-step and stepwise procedures are derived and then compared with each other to determine their relative testing power and testing error in a simulation study. Finally, the suggested procedures are illustrated with two clinical examples. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ethnobotanical survey presents the first step in the identification of new bioactive compounds. This study aimed to collect, document and analyse data on the traditional use of medicinal plants in Jablanica district (South-Eastern Serbia) and to compare traditional knowledge with scientifically proven data. Ethnobotanical study was carried out using semi-structured interviews with 103 informants. Discussion of the results was performed after the quantitative ethnobotany factors were calculated. Comparison of the data was done with those of European Medicines Agency (EMA), Yugoslav Pharmacopoeia 1984 (Ph. Jug. IV) and relevant scientific papers. The informants reported data on 89 medicinal plants belonging to 49 families in Jablanica district. The dominantly used families were Lamiaceae and Asteraceae, while Hypericum perforatum L., Mentha × piperita L. and Matricaria chamomilla L. were the species with the highest number of use reports. The most frequently reported indications were respiratory, gastrointestinal, dermatologic, and psychological diseases. The species with most diverse uses were Taraxacum campylodes G.E.Haglund, Achillea millefolium L. and Rosa canina L. According to our results, medicinal plants in Jablanica district are mainly used for treating minor health issues as a mode of primary health care. The wide application of species belonging to Lamiaceae and Asteraceae families can be partially attributed to the fact that many cosmopolitan medicinal plant species belongs to these families and also to their predominance in the flora of Jablanica districts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

With the advancement of clinical research and the increased burden on laboratory services, there is an unmet need for guidelines regarding proper laboratory functioning and reliable data generation. Several organizations from all over the world have published guidelines for these clinical and research laboratories. Good Clinical Laboratory Practices (GCLP) are stepwise procedures aimed at strengthening the quality of test results produced by all clinical laboratories engaged in human sample analysis. In this article, we attempt a comparison of the GCLP guidelines recently issued by the Indian Council of Medical Research with the guidelines released by the World Health Organization and the European Medicines Agency. Also, we have included and discussed several suggestions that, if included, will lead to the strengthening of the laboratory practices used for both research and patient care for overall improvement in the Indian healthcare system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Cancer is no longer treated on the basis of its histological lineage alone; more and more drugs are being developed that are directed toward specific molecular and immunological features. Monoclonal antibodies are one type of selectively acting therapeutic agent. As part of this development, antibody-drug conjugates („ADCs") have been approved in recent years for the treatment of hematologic and solid malignancies. Methods: This review is based on pertinent articles retrieved by a selective search in PubMed, as well as on papers presented at international congresses of specialist societies such as the European Society for Medical Oncology, the American Society of Clinical Oncology, and the American Association for Cancer Research, and information published on the websites of the European Medicines Agency, the Food and Drug Administration, and the German Joint Federal Committee. Results: The efficacy of the nine ADCs currently approved in the European Union (as of 12/2022) is derived from technical improvements in the conjugation process, the introduction of novel linkers for the covalent binding of cytotoxic agents to the Fc portion of the antibody, and the development of new, potent cytotoxic agents. Compared to conventional cancer therapies, the approved ADCs improve treatment outcomes with respect to tumor remission, time to tumor progression and, in some cases, overall survival by specifically channeling cytotoxic agents into the malignant target cells and thereby limiting, at least to some extent, the exposure of healthy tissue to adverse effects. Various potential side effects still require attention, including venous occlusive disease, pneumonitis, ocular keratopathy, and skin rash. The development of effective ADCs requires the identification of tumor-selective targets to which ADCs can bind. Conclusion: ADCs are a novel category of drugs for the treatment of cancer. Their approval is mainly, but not exclusively, based on the favorable findings of randomized, controlled phase III trials. ADCs are already helping to improve the outcomes of treatment for cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The recent benefit–risk framework (BRF) developed by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is intended to improve the clarity and consistency in communicating the reasoning behind the FDA's decisions, acting as an important advancement in US drug regulation. In the PDUFA VI implementation plan, the FDA states that it will continue to explore more structured or quantitative decision analysis approaches; however, it restricts their use within the current BRF that is purely qualitative. By contrast, European regulators and researchers have been long exploring the use of quantitative decision analysis approaches for evaluating drug benefit–risk balance. In this paper, we show how quantitative modelling, backed by decision theory, could complement and extend the FDA's BRF to better support the appraisal of evidence and improve decision outcomes. After providing relevant scientific definitions for benefit–risk assessment and describing the FDA and European Medicines Agency (EMA) frameworks, we explain the components of and differences between qualitative and quantitative approaches. We present lessons learned from the EMA experience with the use of quantitative modelling and we provide evidence of its benefits, illustrated by a real case study that helped to resolve differences of judgements among EMA regulators. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Europe needs a sustainable system for timely, high-quality evidence on vaccine benefits and risks. • European vaccine stakeholders have different perspectives but similar information needs. • The ADVANCE project (now VAC4EU) has developed and tested a system to generate the necessary evidence. The influenza A/H1N1 pandemic in 2009 taught us that the monitoring of vaccine benefits and risks in Europe had potential for improvement if different public and private stakeholders would collaborate better (public health institutes (PHIs), regulatory authorities, research institutes, vaccine manufacturers). The Innovative Medicines Initiative (IMI) subsequently issued a competitive call to establish a public-private partnership to build and test a novel system for monitoring vaccine benefits and risks in Europe. The ADVANCE project (Accelerated Development of Vaccine benefit-risk Collaboration in Europe) was created as a result. The objective of this paper is to describe the perspectives of key stakeholder groups of the ADVANCE consortium for vaccine benefit-risk monitoring and their views on how to build a European system addressing the needs and challenges of such monitoring. These perspectives and needs were assessed at the start of the ADVANCE project by the European Medicines Agency together with representatives of the main stakeholders in the field of vaccines within and outside the ADVANCE consortium (i.e. research institutes, public health institutes, medicines regulatory authorities, vaccine manufacturers, patient associations). Although all stakeholder representatives stated they conduct vaccine benefit-risk monitoring according to their own remit, needs and obligations, they are faced with similar challenges and needs for improved collaboration. A robust, rapid system yielding high-quality information on the benefits and risks of vaccines would therefore support their decision making. ADVANCE has developed such a system and has tested its performance in a series of proof of concept (POC) studies. The system, how it was used and the results from the POC studies are described in the papers in this supplementary issue. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In the EU, clinical assessors, rapporteurs and the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use are obliged to assess the ethical aspects of a clinical development program and include major ethical flaws in the marketing authorization deliberation processes. To this date, we know very little about the manner that these regulators put this obligation into action. In this paper, we intend to look into the manner and the extent that ethical issues discovered during inspection have reached the deliberation processes.Methods: To gather data, we used the Dutch Medicines Evaluation Board database and first searched for the inspections, and their accompanying site inspection reports and integrated inspection reports, related to central marketing authorization applications (henceforth, application/s) of drugs submitted to the European Medicines Agency (EMA) from 2011 to 2015. We then extracted inspection findings that were purely of ethical nature, i.e., those that did not affect the benefit/risk balance of the study (issues related to informed consent, research ethics committees, and respect for persons). Only findings graded at least major by the inspectorate were included. Lastly, to identify how many of the ethically relevant findings (ERFs) reach the application deliberation processes, we extracted the relevant joint response assessment reports and reviewed the sections that discussed inspection findings.Results: From 2011 to 2015, there were 390 processed applications, of which 65 had inspection reports and integrated inspection reports accessible via the database of the Dutch Medicines Evaluation Board. Of the 65, we found ERFs in 37 (56.9%). The majority of the ERFs were graded as major and half of the time it was informed-consent related. A third of these findings were related to research ethics committee processes and requirements. Of the 37 inspections with ERFs, 30 were endorsed in the integrated inspection reports as generally GCP compliant. Day 150 joint response assessment reports and Day 180 list of outstanding issues were reviewed for all 37 inspections, and none of the ERFs were carried over in any of the assessment reports or list of outstanding issues.Conclusion: None of the ethically relevant findings, all of which were graded as major or critical in integrated inspection reports, were explicitly carried over to the joint assessment reports. This calls for more transparency in EMA application deliberations on how ERFs are considered, if at all, in the decision-making processes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

GW Research Ltd. provided two separate, but similar, submissions to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) on the clinical and cost-effectiveness of cannabidiol (CBD) 10 mg/kg/day, trade name Epidyolex®, for the adjunctive treatment of seizures associated with Lennox-Gastaut syndrome (LGS) and Dravet syndrome (DS). This paper highlights important methodological issues related to the company submissions, the Evidence Review Group (ERG) reports, and the subsequent development of the NICE guidance by the Appraisal Committee (AC) for the use of CBD. The company identified four randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of CBD (GWPCARE1 and GWPCARE2 for DS, and GWPCARE3 and GWPCARE4 for LGS) and an ongoing open-label extension study (GWPCARE5) as relevant to both submissions. In these RCTs, CBD in addition to current clinical management (CCM) was compared to CCM without CBD (i.e. CCM plus placebo). GWPCARE2 and GWPCARE3 were three-arm studies and compared two dosages of CBD (10 mg/kg/day and 20 mg/kg/day) in addition to CCM and CCM plus placebo. GWPCARE1 and GWPCARE4 compared CBD (20 mg/kg/day) in addition to CCM and CCM plus placebo. Both DS patients in GWPCARE2 and LGS patients in GWPCARE3 who received 10 mg/kg/day CBD in addition to CCM achieved better seizure frequency outcomes than those who received CCM plus placebo. In the company's base case, use of CBD for LGS patients resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £31,107 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained and, for DS patients, £36,046 per QALY gained versus CCM. The ERG considered that these ICERs were extremely uncertain and suffered from validity issues concerning model structure (e.g. patients receiving CCM moved back to baseline drop seizure frequency), input (e.g. inclusion of caregivers' QALYs), and transparency issues (e.g. hidden worksheets and coding in Visual Basic for Applications), and hence incorporated adjustments to the original base case which increased the ICERs. During the process, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) licence granted marketing authorisation for CBD only in conjunction with clobazam. Hence, the company provided evidence from this subgroup in an additional submission, which resulted in an ICER of £33,721 per QALY gained for LGS and an ICER of £32,471 per QALY gained for DS. In this submission and clarifications, the ERG was able to verify and validate most of the company's responses to the ERG's concerns. However, some issues remained regarding the face validity of model assumptions on patient pathways after treatment discontinuation. Finally, the AC recommended CBD with clobazam as an option for treating seizures associated with LGS and DS in patients aged 2 years and older only if (1) the frequency of drop seizures is checked every 6 months and CBD is stopped if the frequency has not fallen by at least 30% compared with 6 months before starting treatment and (2) the company provides CBD according to the commercial arrangement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Medicines receiving a conditional marketing authorization through Medicines Adaptive Pathways to Patients (MAPPs) will be a challenge for payers. The "introduction" of MAPPs is already seen by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) as a fait accompli, with payers not consulted or involved. However, once medicines are approved through MAPPs, they will be evaluated for funding by payers through different activities. These include Health Technology Assessment (HTA) with often immature clinical data and high uncertainty, financial considerations, and negotiations through different types of agreements, which can require monitoring post launch. Payers have experience with new medicines approved through conditional approval, and the fact that MAPPs present additional challenges is a concern from their perspective. There may be some activities where payers can collaborate. The final decisions on whether to reimburse a new medicine via MAPPs will have more variation than for medicines licensed via conventional processes. This is due not only to increasing uncertainty associated with medicines authorized through MAPPs but also differences in legal frameworks between member states. Moreover, if the financial and side-effect burden from the period of conditional approval until granting full marketing authorization is shifted to the postauthorization phase, payers may have to bear such burdens. Collection of robust data during routine clinical use is challenging along with high prices for new medicines during data collection. This paper presents the concept of MAPPs and possible challenges. Concerns and potential ways forward are discussed and a number of recommendations are presented from the perspective of payers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper evaluates the relative efficiency of a sample of 37 large pharmaceutical laboratories in the period 2008-2013 using a data envelopment analysis (DEA) approach. We describe in detail the procedure followed to select and construct relevant inputs and outputs that characterize the production and innovation activity of these pharmaceutical firms. Models are estimated with financial information from Datastream, including R&D investment, and the number of new drugs authorized by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) considering the time effect. The relative performances of these firms-taking into consideration the strategic importance of R&D-suggest that the pharmaceutical industry is a highly competitive sector given that there are many laboratories at the efficient frontier and many inefficient laboratories close to this border. Additionally, we use data from S&P Capital IQ to analyze 2071 financial transactions announced by our sample of laboratories as an alternative way to gain access to new drugs, and we link these transactions with R&D investment and DEA efficiency. We find that efficient laboratories make on average more financial transactions, and the relative size of each transaction is larger. However, pharmaceutical companies that simultaneously are more efficient and invest more internally in R&D announce smaller transactions relative to total assets. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper reviews the main tools for communicating benefit-risk medicines information to patients that are used, or could be used, by pharmaceutical regulators. One highly successful tool from the food safety sector (front-of-package traffic-light labelling) and the mental models approach (which provides a framework for developing new tools) are also reviewed as they show great promise for being usefully adapted to the pharmaceutical context. The evolution of benefit-risk medicines communication is first contextualised within the broader risk communication literature. Three distinct goals are then made explicit before critically examining the evidence for and against tools developed in the US (e.g. at the Food and Drug Administration [FDA]) and Europe (e.g. at the European Medicines Agency [EMA]). These goals are (i) sharing information (e.g. publishing clinical trial and adverse event data online); (ii) changing patients' beliefs by conveying factual knowledge (e.g. patient information leaflets and the drugs facts box); and (iii) changing behaviour (e.g. patient alert cards and warning labels). The mental models approach and traffic-light labelling, developed outside the pharmaceutical context, are then examined. Ultimately, the paper provides a helicopter view of the variety of benefit-risk communication tools that are used, or could be used, by pharmaceutical regulators in the US and Europe. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Enhanced Safety Surveillance for seasonal influenza vaccines is mandatory in EU since 2014/15. • Data from Enhanced Passive Safety Surveillance for Influvac® and Influvac® Tetra are presented. • Passive surveillance implemented for Influvac® & Influvac® Tetra complies with EU requirements. • Results confirm the favourable safety profiles of Influvac® and Influvac® Tetra. In 2014, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) set out requirements for an enhanced safety surveillance for seasonal influenza vaccines. This paper presents data from the yearly Enhanced Passive Safety Surveillance (EPSS) implemented for Influvac® since season 2014/15 and continued for Influvac® Tetra from season 2018/19 onwards. In seven consecutive seasons, an EPSS, aiming for at least 1,000 vaccinees (additional target of 100 vaccinees per five predefined age groups), was conducted in Germany, where market characteristics were expected to allow for a quick generation of representative data. Reactogenicity data in terms of reporting rates, severity and duration of pre-specified local and systemic adverse events of interest (AEI) were collected using response cards, which were completed by vaccinees and returned seven days after vaccination via regular mail. In addition, response cards contained a call center number to enhance reporting of other than pre-specified adverse events. The primary target of at least 1,000 vaccinees was surpassed in all seasons, as was the additional target of 100 adults and elderly. Reactogenicity data were in line with known safety profile of Influvac® and Influvac® Tetra. In children, the target was mostly met in seasons when the EPSS was conducted for Influvac®, but not in seasons when it was conducted for Influvac® Tetra. Although the data for Influvac® Tetra are based on a low number of paediatric vaccinees, they do not indicate a different reactogenicity profile of Influvac® Tetra compared with Influvac®. No signals were identified. The EPSS set up for Influvac® and Influvac® Tetra proved a robust and effective methodology to comply with the objectives of EMÁ's guidance on enhanced safety surveillance of seasonal influenza vaccines. Safety data from seven consecutive seasons confirmed the favourable safety profile of both vaccines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This special issue of Social Studies of Science centers on the topic of regulation in medicine and, in particular, on the notion of regulatory objectivity, defined as a new form of objectivity in biomedicine that generates conventions and norms through concerted programs of action based on the use of a variety of systems for the collective production of evidence. The papers in the special issue suggest ways in which the notion of regulatory objectivity can be tested, extended, revised, or superseded by more appropriate notions. They insist on the need to examine more closely clinical-therapeutic (and not just clinical-research) activities, and to pay more attention to the activities of regulatory agencies such as the US Food and Drug Administration and to standard-setting organizations. They call attention to the professional and organizational activities surrounding the mobilization of conventions for regulating clinical practices. Finally, they provide material that can help us to think about how analytical notions such as regulatory objectivity may or may not inform interventionist research projects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: There is a trend for more flexibility in timing of evidence generation in relation to marketing authorization, including the option to complete phase III trials after authorization or not at all. This paper investigated the relation between phase II and III clinical trial efficacy in oncology. Methods: All oncology drugs approved by the European Medicines Agency (2007–2016) were included. Phase II and phase III trials were matched based on indication and treatment and patient characteristics. Reported objective response rates (ORR), median progression‐free survival (PFS) and median overall survival (OS) were analysed through weighted mixed‐effects regression with previous treatment, treatment regimen, blinding, randomization, marketing authorization type and cancer type as covariates. Results: A total of 81 phase II‐III matches were identified including 252 trials. Mean (standard deviation) weighted difference (phase III minus II) was −4.2% (17.4) for ORR, 2.1 (6.7) months for PFS and −0.3 (5.1) months for OS, indicating very small average differences between phases. Differences varied substantially between individual indications: from −46.6% to 47.3% for ORR, from −5.3 to 35.9 months for PFS and from −13.3 to 10.8 months for OS. All covariates except blinding were associated with differences in effect sizes for at least 1 outcome. Conclusions: The lack of marked average differences between phases may encourage decision‐makers to regard the quality of design and total body of evidence instead of differentiating between phases of clinical development. The large variability emphasizes that replication of study findings remains essential to confirm efficacy of oncology drugs and discern variables associated with demonstrated effects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: In 2010 the European Medicines Agency allowed a two-stage design in bioequivalence studies. However, in the public domain there are mainly articles describing the theoretical and statistical base for the application of the two-stage design. One of the reasons seems to be the lack of practical guidance for the Sponsors on when and how the two-stage design can be beneficial in bioequivalence studies. Methods: Different variants with positive and negative outcomes have been evaluated, including a pivotal study, pilot + pivotal study and two-stage study. The scientific perspective on the two-stage bioequivalence study has been confronted with the industrial one. Results: Key information needed to conduct a bioequivalence study – such as in vitro data and pharmacokinetics – have been listed and organized into a decision scheme. Advantages and disadvantages of the two-stage design have been summarized. Conclusion: The use of the two-stage design in bioequivalence studies seems to be a beneficial alternative to the 2 × 2 crossover study. Basic information on the properties of the active substance and the characteristics of the drug form are needed to make an initial decision to carry out the two-stage study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper we study approaches for dealing with treatment when developing a clinical prediction model. Analogous to the estimand framework recently proposed by the European Medicines Agency for clinical trials, we propose a 'predictimand' framework of different questions that may be of interest when predicting risk in relation to treatment started after baseline. We provide a formal definition of the estimands matching these questions, give examples of settings in which each is useful and discuss appropriate estimators including their assumptions. We illustrate the impact of the predictimand choice in a dataset of patients with end-stage kidney disease. We argue that clearly defining the estimand is equally important in prediction research as in causal inference. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Average bioequivalence tests are used in clinical trials to determine whether a generic drug has the same effect as an original drug in the population. For highly variable drugs whose intra-subject variances of direct drug effects are high, extra criteria are needed in bioequivalence studies. Currently used average bioequivalence tests for highly variable drugs recommended by the European Medicines Agency and the US Food and Drug Administration use sample estimators in the null hypotheses of interest. They cannot control the empirical type I error rate, so the consumer's risk is higher than the predetermined level. In this paper, we propose two new statistically sound methods that can control the empirical type I error rate without involving any sample estimators in the null hypotheses. In the proposed methods, we consider the average level of direct drug effects and the intra-subject variance of the direct drug effects. The first proposed method tests the latter parameter first to determine whether a product should be regarded as a highly variable drug, and then tests the former using corresponding bioequivalence limits. The second proposed method tests these two parameters simultaneously to capture the bioequivalence region. Extensive simulations are done to compare these methods. The simulation results show that the proposed methods have good performance on controlling the empirical type I error rate. The proposed methods are useful for pharmaceutical manufacturers and regulators. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

For some years now, gadolinium oxysulfide nanoparticles (NPs) appear as strong candidates for very efficient multimodal in vivo imaging by: 1) Magnetic Resonance (MRI), 2) X-ray Computed Tomography (CT) and 3) photoluminescence imaging. In this paper, we present a selection of results centered on the evaluation of physico-chemical stability, toxicity, bio-distribution and excretion mechanisms of Gd 2 O 2 S:Ln3+ nanoparticles intravenously injected in rats. Two formulations are here tested with a common matrix and different dopants: Gd 2 O 2 S:Eu3+ 5% and Gd 2 O 2 S:Yb3+ 4% /Tm3+ 0.1%. The NPs appear to be almost insoluble in pure water and human plasma but corrosion/degradation phenomenon appears in acidic conditions classically encountered in cell lysosomes. Whole body in vivo distribution, excretion and toxicity evaluation revealed a high tolerance of nanoparticles with a long-lasting imaging signal associated with a slow hepatobiliary clearance and very weak urinary excretion. The results show that the majority of the injected product (>60%) has been excreted through the feces after five months. Experiments have evidenced that the NPs mainly accumulate in macrophage-rich organs, that is mainly liver and spleen and to a lesser extent lungs and bones (mainly marrow). No significant amounts have been detected in other organs such as heart, kidneys, brain, intestine and skin. Gd 2 O 2 S:Ln3+ NPs appeared to be very well tolerated up to 400 mg/kg when administered intravenously. Since 2011, we have focused our work on Gd 2 O 2 S nanoparticles (NPs) for multimodal bioimaging using fluorescence, Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) and Computed Tomography with very efficient results already published. However, since the European Medicines Agency has concluded its review of gadolinium contrast agents, confirming recommendations to restrict the use of some linear gadolinium agents used in MRI, a particular attention must be paid to any new contrast media containing gadolinium. Therefore, we present in this paper a compilation of studies about toxicity, bio-distribution and excretion mechanisms of Gd 2 O 2 S:Ln3+ NPs intravenously injected into rats. We also present an in vitro kinetic study of NPs degradation in aqueous and biological media to provide some information on chemical and biological stability. Image, graphical abstract [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Developing a novel drug, including discovery, nonclinical toxicology studies, initial clinical trials, and thorough pivotal studies, may take many years. Once an applicant has generated this comprehensive body of data, the final step prior to regulatory approval is Health Authority review of the marketing authorization application. Review by regulatory authorities to evaluate whether the data support a positive benefit/risk profile takes many months, adding additional time before patients may access therapy. In this paper, we discuss the various opportunities the US Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency offer to expedite the drug development and regulatory approval timelines for drugs intended to treat serious diseases and unmet medical needs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Comparative Economic Research is the property of Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Lodzkiego and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Background: Regulatory agencies, such as the European Medicines Agency and Health Canada, are requiring the public sharing of clinical trial reports that are used to make drug approval decisions. Both agencies have provided guidance for the quantitative anonymization of these clinical reports before they are shared. There is limited empirical information on the effectiveness of this approach in protecting patient privacy for clinical trial data.Methods: In this paper we empirically test the hypothesis that when these guidelines are implemented in practice, they provide adequate privacy protection to patients. An anonymized clinical study report for a trial on a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug that is sold as a prescription eye drop was subjected to re-identification. The target was 500 patients in the USA. Only suspected matches to real identities were reported.Results: Six suspected matches with low confidence scores were identified. Each suspected match took 24.2 h of effort. Social media and death records provided the most useful information for getting the suspected matches.Conclusions: These results suggest that the anonymization guidance from these agencies can provide adequate privacy protection for patients, and the modes of attack can inform further refinements of the methodologies they recommend in their guidance for manufacturers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Simple Summary: The use of a controlled-release capsule of monensin for the prevention of ketosis in dairy cows, nowadays, has become widespread. In Europe, this is the only use of monensin permitted in dairy cows. Literature regarding the use of this molecule as a feed additive or controlled-release capsule is extensive, and results reported across studies vary with respect to the mode and dose of administration, target animals, and period of lactation. Therefore, the aim of this review was to summarize the literature observations regarding the use of monensin for the prevention of ketosis in dairy cows during the transition period. Since the approval by the European Medicines Agency in 2013 of a monensin controlled-release capsule (CRC) for the prevention of ketosis in dairy cows, there has been widespread use across Europe. In recent decades, several papers have investigated the effects of monensin used as a CRC or as a feed additive to improve cattle energy metabolism and improve feed efficiency. Since the CRC is the only form of monensin permitted in Europe in dairy cows, the objective of this review was to report and summarize observations from the literature on the effects of this treatment in transition cows. The peer-reviewed literature published from 1997 was scanned, and papers written in English were evaluated for eligibility. Only papers evaluating the use of monensin in dairy cows for the prevention of ketosis during the transition period were reviewed. In total, 42 papers met the required criteria and were included in this review. The major findings focused on cow metabolism and health, rumen fermentation and milk production and quality. Overall, the review of the existing literature confirmed that monensin delivered as a CRC during the transition period has effects of different magnitude compared to other forms, doses or durations of administration. Studies agree on the antiketotic effects of this treatment, showing evidence of an increased propionate production in the rumen, reduced blood β-hydroxybutyrate, and improved liver function in treated cows, mainly resulting in reduced incidence of peripartum disease. On the contrary, the effects of CRC on ammonia production and rumen microflora are less robust than those reported for other forms. Of importance for the European market is the well-documented absence of any negative impact on milk and cheese production and composition using the CRC treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Detecting safety signals attributed to a drug in scientific literature is a fundamental issue in pharmacovigilance. The constant increase in the volume of publications requires the automation of this tedious task, in order to find and extract relevant articles from the pack. This task is critical, as serious Adverse Drug Reactions (ADRs) still account for a large number of hospital admissions each year. Objectives: The aim of this study is to develop an augmented intelligence methodology for automatically identifying relevant publications mentioning an established link between a Drug and a Serious Adverse Event, according to the European Medicines Agency (EMA) definition of seriousness. Methods: The proposed pipeline, called LiSA (for Literature Search Application), is based on three independent deep learning models supporting a precise detection of safety signals in the biomedical literature. By combining a Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers (BERT) algorithms and a modular architecture, the pipeline achieves a precision of 0.81 and a recall of 0.89 at sentences level in articles extracted from PubMed (either abstract or full-text). We also measured that by using LiSA, a medical reviewer increases by a factor of 2.5 the number of relevant documents it can collect and evaluate compared to a simple keyword search. In the interest of re-usability, emphasis was placed on building a modular pipeline allowing the insertion of other NLP modules to enrich the results provided by the system, and extend it to other use cases. In addition, a lightweight visualization tool was developed to analyze and monitor safety signal results. Conclusions: Overall, the generic pipeline and the visualization tool proposed in this article allows for efficient and accurate monitoring of serious adverse drug reactions from the literature and can easily be adapted to similar pharmacovigilance use cases. To facilitate reproducibility and benefit other research studies, we also shared a first benchmark dataset for Serious Adverse Drug Events detection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A biosimilar is a high quality biological medicine shown to be in essence the same as an original product. The European Medicines Agency (EMA) paved the way in the regulatory arena by creating a safeguarding framework for the development of biosimilars. Biosimilar is thus a regulatory term that alludes to the evidence-based studies required to demonstrate such very high similarity. They are therefore not innovative products but the pathway laid down by the EMA for their approval represented a new paradigm. This has brought some confusion and has cast doubts among healthcare professionals about the scientific evidence behind their authorization. Many papers have been published to clarify the concept, and to reassure those professionals, but misconceptions frequently still arise. Unfortunately, this prevents biosimilars from deploying their full therapeutic added value. This paper is intended to approach those misconceptions from a new angle, by explaining what a biosimilar is not...and why. A biosimilar is neither a generic, nor an original product. It is not a biobetter or a 'stand-alone'. Therefore, it should not be managed as such therapeutically, commercially or from a healthcare policy viewpoint. The EMA's criteria were acknowledged by other agencies, but a significant regulatory gap with a vast majority of regulatory bodies still remains. This leaves room for the so-called non-original biologics (NOB), i.e. non-biosimilar biologics, to be launched in many regions. Raising awareness of what a biosimilar is and what it is not, will generate trust in biosimilars among healthcare professionals and will ultimately benefit patients [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Tirzepatide is the first ever once-weekly, injectable gastric inhibitory peptide/glucagon-like peptide 1 (GIP/GLP-1) dual agonist approved by the European Medicines Agency for type 2 diabetes. The efficacy and safety of tirzepatide have been evaluated in five global, randomized, double-blind or open-label, phase 3 studies which enrolled over 7000 people living with type 2 diabetes, across various stages of disease and with different characteristics at baseline. In this short commentary we report the salient data of the most recent trials on tirzepatide and GLP-1 receptor agonists from a clinical point of view, with the aim of highlighting similarities and mutual differences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: In 2021, the European Medicines Agency supported the "Covid Vaccine Monitor (CVM)," an active surveillance project spanning 13 European countries aimed at monitoring the safety of COVID-19 vaccines in general and special populations (i.e., pregnant/breastfeeding women, children/adolescents, immunocompromised people, and people with a history of allergies or previous SARS-CoV-2 infection). Italy participated in this project as a large multidisciplinary network called the "ilmiovaccinoCOVID19 collaborating group." Methods: The study aimed to describe the experience of the Italian network "ilmiovaccinoCOVID19 collaborating group" in the CVM context from June 2021 to February 2023. Comprising about 30 partners, the network aimed to facilitate vaccinee recruitment. Participants completed baseline and follow-up questionnaires within 48 h from vaccination over a 6-month period. Analyses focused on those who completed both the baseline and the first follow-up questionnaire (Q1), exploring temporal trends, vaccination campaign correlation, and loss to follow-up. Characteristics of recruited vaccinees and vaccineereported adverse drug reactions (ADRs) were compared with passive surveillance data in Italy. Results: From June 2021 to November 2022, 22,384,663 first doses and 38,207,452 booster doses of COVID-19 vaccines were administered in Italy. Simultaneously, the study enrolled 1,229 and 2,707 participants for the first and booster doses, respectively. Of these, 829 and 1,879 vaccinees, respectively, completed both baseline and at least Q1 and were included in the analyses, with a significant proportion of them (57.8%/34.3%) belonging to special cohorts. Most vaccinees included in the analyses were women. Comirnaty® (69%) and Spikevax® (29%) were the most frequently administered vaccines. ADR rates following Comirnaty® and Spikevax® were higher after the second dose, particularly following Spikevax®. Serious ADRs were infrequent. Differences were observed in ADR characteristics between CVM and Italian passive surveillance. Conclusion: This study confirmed the favorable safety profile of COVID-19 vaccines, with findings consistent with pivotal clinical trials of COVID-19 vaccines, although different proportions of serious ADRs compared to spontaneous reporting were observed. Continuous evaluation through cohort event monitoring studies provides real-time insights crucial for regulatory responses. Strengthening infrastructure and implementing early monitoring strategies are essential to enhance vaccine safety assessment and prepare for future pandemics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Today, the approval for a generic topical product includes the presentation of therapeutic equivalence to the originator based on clinical trials. To facilitate this procedure, in 2018 the European Medicines Agency (EMA) published a draft guideline on quality and equivalence of topical products, which includes request parameters regarding the quality of the newly developed generic product and test protocols for the implementation of equivalence tests regarding efficacy. Methods: To date, no data are available on the quality and evidence of the proposed test conditions. In this study, we performed an in vitro penetration test (IVPT) following the terms of the EMA draft guideline on two authorized topical products for which therapeutic equivalence was already proven during the approval process. Results: The complex biometric data processing revealed that in vitro equivalence could not be observed for all skin sections for either originator or generic product. Moreover, the necessity of the negative control proposed in the draft guideline is more than questionable. From the results presented, there were indications that a reduced number of skin donors would be sufficient to achieve statistically significant equivalence in the comparison of all applied formulations. Here, n = 7 donors was proposed instead of n ≥ 12 as the EMA draft guideline demands, decreasing the degree of biodiversity simultaneously. Moreover, a higher number of independent replicates (n > 2) was proposed for proper statistics. Conclusion: This bioequivalence study shows insufficient parameters, which should be discussed together with the EMA draft guideline. Plain Language Summary (PLS): Today in Europe the approval of generic drugs requires clinical trials to present therapeutic equivalence to the originator. To facilitate this time- and cost-intensive process, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) published a draft guideline in 2018 proposing test protocols for carrying out equivalence tests for drugs applied on human skin. Although its publication is over 5 years old, it is still in a draft version; moreover, so far no evidence has been presented on whether the experimental settings in the test protocols can prove equivalence. This study should prove the EMA test protocol for in vitro permeation tests (IVPT) as closely as possible on two authorized topical products for which therapeutic equivalence was already proven during the approval process to determine whether their equivalence could be observed by this pharmacokinetic approach as well. Due to the experimental setup, a penetration test was performed to survey the drug diffusion behavior over the skin cross section instead of the amount of drug which permeates through the skin. To the best of our knowledge, this study is the first work published regarding that topic. Here, bioequivalence of the preparations applied, which were equivalent when they were tested on patients during their approval, was not found overall. We recommend reducing the number of donors and increasing the number of replicates to achieve a higher power for the statistical data evaluation. Moreover, an evaluation of the drug amount at the pharmaceutical place of action should be considered in the EMA guideline. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 2016, the European Medicines Agency published the conclusions of its pilot on adaptive pathways, with products in early stages of development still building up to their marketing authorisation. Adaptive pathways rests on three principles: iterative development; gathering evidence through real‐life use to supplement clinical trial data; and early engagement of patients, payers and health technology assessment bodies in discussions on a medicine's development. While the pilot has now finished, the practical system‐wide implications of employing the adaptive pathways approach are not known and further consideration of these three principles is required. In this paper we used the three principles that underpin adaptive pathways to discuss main scientific and European policy developments likely to determine progress on further implementing adaptive pathways in the European setting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Critical Path for Parkinson's (CPP) Imaging Biomarker and Modeling and Simulation working groups aimed to achieve qualification opinion by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) Committee for Medical Products for Human Use (CHMP) for the use of baseline dopamine transporter neuroimaging for patient selection in early Parkinson's disease clinical trials. This paper describes the regulatory science strategy to achieve this goal. CPP is an international consortium of three Parkinson's charities and nine pharmaceutical partners, coordinated by the Critical Path Institute. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

European Medicines Agency (EMA) issued a final decision on September 01, 2014 that restricts the maximum daily dose of domperidone to 30 mg and treatment duration to 7 days. This paper presents a critical review of the scientific basis of the literatures having a role in the decision of EMA on domperidone with an approach based on statistical and epidemiological perspective. Although observational studies used by EMA were published, the EMA didn't use an algorithm including "randomized clinical trials" according to evidence-based medicine when presenting their results. In conclusion, the results obtained from published studies are controversial, especially for the bias. From these publications, it cannot be concluded that domperidone exposure definitely increases the risk of "sudden cardiac death", "death associated with ventricular arrhythmia" or "ventricular arrhythmia" The most concrete result of these studies is that the risk is higher with metoclopramide exposure compared to domperidone exposure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The cardioprotective and anti-inflammatory effects of long chain omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (n3 PUFA) are believed to be partly mediated by their oxygenated metabolites (oxylipins). In the last two decades interest in a novel group of autacoids termed specialized pro-resolving mediators (SPMs) increased. These are actively involved in the resolution of inflammation. SPMs are multiple hydroxylated fatty acids including resolvins, maresins, and protectins derived from the n3 PUFA eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) as well as lipoxins derived from arachidonic acid (ARA). In the present paper, we developed an LC-MS/MS method for a comprehensive set of 18 SPMs derived from ARA, EPA, and DHA and integrated it into our targeted metabolomics platform. Quantification was based on external calibration utilizing five deuterated internal standards in combination with a second internal standard for quality assessment of sample preparation in each sample. The tandem mass spectrometric parameters were carefully optimized for sensitive and specific detection. The influence of source parameters of the used AB Sciex 6500 QTRAP instrument as well as electronic parameters and the selection of transitions are discussed. The method was validated/characterized based on the criteria listed in the European Medicines Agency (EMA) guideline on bioanalytical method validation and method performance is demonstrated regarding recovery of internal standards (between 78 ± 4% and 87 ± 3% from 500 μL of human serum) as well as extraction efficacy of SPMs in spiked plasma (intra-day accuracy within ±20 and ±15% at 0.1 and 0.3 nM in plasma, respectively). Based on the lower limit of quantification of 0.02–0.2 nM, corresponding to 0.18–2.7 pg on column, SPMs were generally not detectable/quantifiable in plasma and serum supporting that circulating levels of SPMs are very low, i.e., <0.1 nM in healthy subjects. Following septic shock or peritonitis, SPMs could be quantified in the samples of several patients. However, in these studies with a small number of patients no clear correlation with severity of inflammation could be observed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In controlled clinical trials, balanced allocation over covariates is often viewed as an essential component in ensuring valid treatment comparisons. Minimization, sometimes called 'dynamic allocation', or 'covariate-adaptive randomization' has an advantage over stratified randomization, in that it is able to achieve balance over a large number of covariates when the sample size is small to medium. Despite its effectiveness, minimization has been questioned by regulatory agencies, mainly because of its increased complexity in practice and its potential impact on subsequent analysis. In recent years, however, with developments in clinical trials information technology, as well as advances in statistical theory, the attitudes toward minimization have evolved. In its 2013 draft guidelines, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) provided instructive guidelines for the implementation of minimization. In this paper we review the broad class of methods that belong to minimization, including its original forms for balancing over covariate margins and its generalization to balancing over other subgroups of interest or over continuous covariates. Moreover, we review the theoretical development in recent years, including the large-sample properties of balance under minimization, the impact of minimization on inference for different data types, and on suitable randomization tests. WIREs Comput Stat 2014, 6:288-303. doi: 10.1002/wics.1309 For further resources related to this article, please visit the . Conflict of interest: The authors have declared no conflicts of interest for this article. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Registries will enable cohort studies to be performed, which are usually considered to be the best quality of observational studies. The quality of data of registries can be increased if is it possible to merge results ('crosstalk') between registries. A prerequisite for that is an agreed uniform core set of data to be collected and uniform definitions on the items to be collected. This paper discusses problems and barriers with existing registries and provides recommendations from an EMA workshop (European Medicines Agency), for core common data sets and how to secure the quality of data collected. The PedNet registry including >2200 children with haemophilia is presented as an example of a registry/cohort study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The starting point of the MindTheRisk project has been to raise socio-political questions about whether lay public’s understanding is satisfied about the genetic information they receive, and to what extent regulators do take this aspect on board when they decide to allow or restrict genetic testing or to develop communications about genetic testing. This article draws on the concepts that have emerged among the risk research community to tackle “risk tolerance’’. It explores the application of those concepts to the sharing and regulating of genetic risk information. We start with a conceptualisation of risk acceptability/tolerability in the genetic context, before turning to concrete hurdles that need to be overcome and questions that need to be answered. Finally, we suggest some direction for policy. The paper is based on an in-depth review supplemented by pilot interviews conducted with the European Medicines Agency, National regulatory agencies, academic and members of a patient organisation, all directly involved in policy. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Between December 2020 and March 2021, the US Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency issued Emergency Use Authorizations and Conditional Marketing Authorizations for the distribution of the first COVID-19 vaccines. Although these vaccines were thoroughly assessed before their approval, regulators required companies to continue ongoing placebo-controlled clinical trials in order to gather further reliable scientific information on their safety and efficacy, as well as to start new studies to evaluate additional candidates. The aim of this paper is to present and discuss the ethical issues raised by the tension between the need to continue these types of clinical trials and the obligations related to the protection of the rights and well-being of research participants. Specifically, we question whether—how, and to what extent—fundamental principles governing research involving human beings can be applied to the current pandemic situation. We argue that continuing ongoing placebo-controlled clinical trials can be considered ethically justifiable only if all participants are adequately informed of any developments that may affect their willingness to remain enrolled, including the current situation of resource scarcity and the prioritization criteria established for vaccination. However, we also argue that currently approved vaccines, which are considered safe and effective enough to be administered to millions of people as part of the vaccination campaign, necessarily represent the "best proven intervention" currently available and, therefore, should be used as comparators in future studies instead of placebo. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Severe post-partum hemorrhage (PPH) is a major cause of maternal mortality worldwide. Recombinant activated factor VII (rFVIIa) has recently been approved by the European Medicines Agency for the treatment of severe PPH if uterotonics fail to achieve hemostasis. Although large randomized controlled trials are lacking, accumulated evidence from smaller studies and international registries supports the efficacy of rFVIIa alongside extended standard treatment to control severe PPH. Because rFVIIa neither substitutes the activity of a missing coagulation factor nor bypasses a coagulation defect in this population, it is not immediately evident how it exerts its beneficial effect. Here, we discuss possible mechanistic explanations for the efficacy of rFVIIa and the published evidence in patients with severe PPH. Recombinant FVIIa may not primarily increase systemic thrombin generation, but may promote local thrombin generation through binding to activated platelets at the site of vascular wall injury. This explanation may also address safety concerns that have been raised over the administration of a procoagulant molecule in a background of increased thromboembolic risk due to both pregnancy-related hemostatic changes and the hemorrhagic state. However, the available safety data for this and other indications are reassuring and the rates of thromboembolic events do not appear to be increased in women with severe PPH treated with rFVIIa. We recommend that the administration of rFVIIa be considered before dilutional coagulopathy develops and used to support the current standard treatment in certain patients with severe PPH. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Targeting IL-17A using Secukinumab, a humanized monoclonal immunoglobulin G1 (IgG1)/κ against IL-17A is a therapeutic option for immune-mediated disorders such as psoriasis and ankylosing spondylitis. The US Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency have approved it for the treatment of moderate to severe plaque psoriasis, active psoriatic arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, and non-radiographic axial spondylarthritis. Recently it has also been approved for use in children with severe plaque psoriasis, active psoriatic arthritis, and enthesitis-related arthritis. This review focuses on the role of Secukinumab in the management of children and adolescents with enthesitis-related arthritis and psoriatic arthritis. We discuss the salient findings of pivotal RCTs and other studies supporting the use of Secukinumab in adults and children, in particular, focusing on its safety and efficacy. Secukinumab is a therapeutic target for psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, and spondyloarthropathies in both adults and children. No major safety signals are observed with its use in short-term follow-up. Thus far, Secukinumab has not been found to significantly increase the risk of tuberculosis (TB). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Psoriasis is a highly prevalent dermatological disease associated with an increased systemic inflammatory response. In addition, joint involvement is also present in around 20% of patients. Therefore, treatment modalities used in this condition should be simultaneously effective at improving skin manifestations, reducing inflammation, and addressing psoriatic arthritis when present. Twenty years ago, the introduction of biologic treatments for psoriasis was a turning point in the management of this condition, offering an effective and reasonably safe option for patients whose disease could not be adequately controlled with conventional therapies. At the moment, Janus Kinase inhibitors (JAKis) are a new class of promising molecules in the management of psoriasis. They are orally administered and can show benefits in patients who failed biologic therapy. We conducted a scoping review in order to identify randomized-controlled trials that investigated different JAKis in patients with plaque psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis, with an emphasis on molecules that have been approved by the European Medicines Agency and the Food and Drug Administration. The added value of this study is that it collected information about JAKis approved for two different indications, plaque psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis, in order to provide an integrated understanding of the range of effects that JAKis have on the whole spectrum of psoriasis manifestations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cystinosis is a rare lysosomal storage disorder caused by autosomal recessive mutations in the CTNS gene that encodes for the cystine transporter cystinosin, which is expressed on the lysosomal membrane mediating the efflux of cystine. Cysteamine bitartrate is a cystine-depleting aminothiol agent approved for the treatment of cystinosis in children and adults. In this study, we developed and validated a liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) method for the determination of cysteamine levels in plasma samples. This LC-MS/MS method was validated according to the European Medicines Agency (EMA)'s guidelines for bioanalytical method validation. An ultra-performance liquid chromatograph (UPLC) coupled with a 6470 mass spectrometry system was used for cysteamine determination. Our validated method was applied to plasma samples from n = 8 cystinosis patients (median, interquartile range (IQR) = 20.5, 8.5–26.0 years). The samples were collected before cysteamine oral administration (pre-dose) and 1 h after (post-dose). Our bioanalytical method fulfilled the regulatory guidelines for method validation. The cysteamine plasma levels in pre-dose samples were 2.57 and 1.50–3.31 μM (median and IQR, respectively), whereas the post-dose samples reported a cysteamine median concentration of 28.00 μM (IQR: 17.60–36.61). Our method allows the rapid determination of cysteamine plasma levels. This method was successfully used in cystinosis patients and, therefore, could be a useful tool for the evaluation of therapy adherence and for future pharmacokinetic (PK) studies involving a higher number of subjects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Eosinophilic Esophagitis is an antigen-mediated inflammatory disease characterized by thickening of the esophageal wall, leading to dysphagia, vomiting, reflux, and abdominal pain. This disease can be treated with a therapeutic approach ranging from diet to pharmacological therapy. Jorveza® (budesonide) and Dupixent® (dupilumab) are treatments for Eosinophilic Esophagitis approved by the European Medicines Agency in adults but not in children. Budesonide-based extemporaneous oral liquid suspensions could be prepared for pediatric use. The main limit of this formulation is that budesonide needs a longer residence time on the esophageal mucosa to solubilize and diffuse in it to exert its local anti-inflammatory effect. Herein, we propose the development of an extemporaneous mucoadhesive oral budesonide solution for the pediatric population. A liquid vehicle containing hydroxypropyl-beta-cyclodextrin as a complexing agent and carboxymethylcellulose sodium as a mucoadhesive excipient was used to prepare budesonide-based formulations. A stable solution at a concentration of 0.7 mg/mL was successfully prepared and characterized. The formulation showed rheological and mucoadhesive properties suitable for an Eosinophilic Esophagitis local prolonged treatment. In this way, pharmacists can prepare stable budesonide-based mucoadhesive solutions, providing both patients and physicians with a new therapeutic option for Eosinophilic Esophagitis pediatric treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a chronic metabolic disease affecting over 500 million people worldwide, which leads to severe complications and to millions of deaths yearly. When therapeutic goals are not reached with diet, physical activity, or non-insulin drugs, starting/adding insulin treatment is recommended by international guidelines. A novel recombinant insulin is icodec, a once-weekly insulin that successfully completed phase III trials and that has recently obtained the marketing authorization approval from the European Medicines Agency. This narrative review aims to assess icodec pharmacological and clinical features concerning evidence on benefit–risk profile, as compared to other basal insulins, addressing the potential impact on patients' unmet needs. Icodec is a full agonist, recombinant human insulin analogue characterized by an ultra-long half-life (196 h), enabling its use in once-weekly administration. Phase III randomized clinical trials involving more than 4000 diabetic patients, mostly type 2 DM, documented non-inferiority of icodec, as compared to currently available basal insulins, in terms of estimated mean reduction of glycated hemoglobin levels; a superiority of icodec, compared to control, was confirmed in insulin-naïve patients (ONWARDS 1, 3, and 5), and in patients previously treated with basal insulin (ONWARDS 2). Icodec safety profile was comparable to the currently available basal insulins. Once-weekly icodec has the potential to improve patients' adherence, thus positively influencing patients' treatment satisfaction as well as quality of life, especially in type 2 DM insulin-naïve patients. An improved adherence might positively influence glycemic target achievement, reduce overall healthcare costs and overcome some of the unmet patients' needs. Icodec has the potential to emerge as a landmark achievement in the evolution of insulin therapy, with a positive impact also for the National Health Services and the whole society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The objective of this research was to review the extent to which health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) and other patient-reported outcomes (PROs) have played a role in drug approval and labelling since 2006, when the US FDA issued its draft guidance on the use of PRO measures and the European Medicines Agency (EMA), its reflection paper on HR-QOL. Methods: This research was conducted through a systematic manual review of therapy area-specific regulatory guidelines (US and EU) and product labels issued during the period 1 January 2006 to 16 November 2010. Results: Fifteen (39.5% of all guidance documents) and 34 (35.8%) guidance documents containing recommendations for the inclusion of PRO endpoints in clinical trials were released by the FDA and the EMA, respectively. The FDA referred to HR-QOL (as a secondary endpoint) in 3 of the 15 (20%) guidances. The EMA recommended use of HR-QOL endpoints in 22 of the 34 (65%) guidance documents. The FDA approved 93 products with PRO endpoints in labelling (out of 432 total approvals). Of those, eight products (8.6% of all products with a PRO claim) documented treatment benefits characterized as HR-QOL. The EMA approved 54 products that included PRO endpoints in labelling (out of 248 total approvals), of which 16 products (29.6% of all products with a PRO claim) reflected HR-QOL data. Conclusion: Our review shows that the patients' perspective in clinical research is important for the EMA and FDA, with HR-QOL endpoints still playing a minor role in product claims. Our analysis suggests that the EMA's receptivity to HR-QOL endpoints is greater than the FDA's, and that both agencies value patient-reported symptom data. Differences between the agencies' acceptance of PRO endpoints, especially HR-QOL, might reflect differences in their structure and organization. As the world's largest medical regulatory agency, the FDA employs an 'army' of experts to review submissions and develop guidance. This internal expertise enables the FDA to take an active role in defining endpoints, developing guidance and regulations that clarify their expectations, and enforcing regulatory policy. By contrast, the EMA, working with a network of over 4500 European experts, relies on clinicians and the scientific community for the definition of validity and the acceptance of an endpoint. Historically, the EMA has been more likely to accept existing measures, including global assessment and diaries, provided the assessments are supported by peer-reviewed publications of the development and validity of the instruments. Thus, the peer-review process and acceptance by the scientific and medical communities greatly influence the acceptance of PRO claims in EMA product approvals. Finally, the FDA's stance may be driven, in part, by the potential use of PRO information in direct-to-consumer advertising and whether such measures are meaningful and interpretable by patients. For the future, we believe that the empowerment of patients in healthcare decision making will foster the use of specific PROs for evaluating the benefits of treatments on criteria that are meaningful to patients, in addition to traditional clinical endpoints. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Clinical trials increasingly occur on a global scale as industry and government sponsors in wealthy countries move trials to low- and middle-income countries. The globalization of clinical research raises important questions about the economical and ethical aspects of clinical research and the translation of trial results to clinical practice: which ethical standards are applied? Are trials results accurate and valid, and can they be extrapolated to other settings? This article provides an overview of the strategy approved by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) to clarify ethical standards for clinical research conducted outside the European Economic Area (EEA) and included in Marketing Authorization Applications. Reference to the EMA Reflection paper is made. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Inadequate dose selection for confirmatory trials is currently still one of the most challenging issues in drug development, as illustrated by high rates of late-stage attritions in clinical development and postmarketing commitments required by regulatory institutions. In an effort to shift the current paradigm in dose and regimen selection and highlight the availability and usefulness of well-established and regulatory-acceptable methods, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) in collaboration with the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries Association (EFPIA) hosted a multistakeholder workshop on dose finding (London 4-5 December 2014). Some methodologies that could constitute a toolkit for drug developers and regulators were presented. These methods are described in the present report: they include five advanced methods for data analysis (empirical regression models, pharmacometrics models, quantitative systems pharmacology models, MCP-Mod, and model averaging) and three methods for study design optimization (Fisher information matrix (FIM)-based methods, clinical trial simulations, and adaptive studies). Pairwise comparisons were also discussed during the workshop; however, mostly for historical reasons. This paper discusses the added value and limitations of these methods as well as challenges for their implementation. Some applications in different therapeutic areas are also summarized, in line with the discussions at the workshop. There was agreement at the workshop on the fact that selection of dose for phase III is an estimation problem and should not be addressed via hypothesis testing. Dose selection for phase III trials should be informed by well-designed dose-finding studies; however, the specific choice of method(s) will depend on several aspects and it is not possible to recommend a generalized decision tree. There are many valuable methods available, the methods are not mutually exclusive, and they should be used in conjunction to ensure a scientifically rigorous understanding of the dosing rationale. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]