Search

Background: Single-arm clinical trials (SAT) are common in drug and biologic submissions for rare or life-threatening conditions, especially when no therapeutic options exist. External control arms (ECAs) improve interpretation of SATs but pose methodological and regulatory challenges. Objective: Through narrative reviews and expert input, we developed a framework for considerations that might influence regulatory use and likelihood of regulatory acceptance of an SAT, identifying non-oncology first indication approvals as an area of interest. We systematically analyzed FDA and EMA approvals using SATs as pivotal evidence. The framework guided outcome abstraction on regulatory responses. Methods: We examined all non-oncology FDA and EMA drug and biologic approvals for first indications from 2019 to 2022 to identify those with SAT as pivotal safety or efficacy evidence. We abstracted outcomes, key study design features, regulator responses to SAT and (where applicable) ECA design, and product label content. Results: Among 20 SAT-based FDA approvals and 17 SAT-based EMA approvals, most common indications were progressive rare diseases with high unmet need/limited therapeutic options and a natural history without spontaneous improvement. Of the types of comparators, most were natural history cohorts (45% FDA; 47% EMA) and baseline controls (40% FDA; 47% EMA). Common critiques were of non-contemporaneous ECAs, subjective endpoints, and baseline covariate imbalance between arms. Conclusion: Based on recent FDA and EMA approvals, the likelihood of regulatory success for SATs with ECAs depends on many design, analytic, and data quality considerations. Our framework is useful in early drug development when considering SAT strategies for evidence generation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The European Medicines Agency Innovation Task Force (ITF) acts as early point of contact for medicine and technology developers to enable innovation during early drug development stages through ITF briefing meetings. Aim: To reflect on the current pace of innovation and to assess the potential of ITF stakeholder interactions, a comprehensive analysis of the ITF briefing meetings held between 2021 and 2022 was conducted with a focus on individual questions raised by the developers and the related feedback provided by the European regulators. Methods: Questions raised during ITF briefing meetings were extracted and categorised into main and sub-categories, revealing different themes across the whole medicine development process such as manufacturing technologies, pre-clinical developments, and clinically relevant questions. Results: There was positive feedback from regulators who gave initial guidance in 85% of the answers, provided concrete examples in 20% of the answers and recommended to continue discussions through additional regulatory procedures in 22% of the answers. Conclusion: This analysis frames the content and the type of topics discussed during ITF briefing meetings. Moreover, it describes the type of regulatory feedback provided to medicine developers and identified potential for improvement of these early interactions. Therefore, this analysis emphasises the role of ITF briefing meetings in fostering innovation in medicine. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The increasing global drug shortage poses a substantial challenge to national healthcare systems and affects access to essential therapies. In Japan, this problem is exacerbated by a large-scale government campaign to switch from brand-name products to generic drugs and manufacturing/marketing authorization holders with poor development and manufacturing controls. Regulatory bodies, such as the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency have developed guidelines aimed at ensuring continuous drug supply and mitigating manufacturing risks. However, Japan's efforts have primarily relied on voluntary industry guidelines, lacking the robust regulatory frameworks of other developed nations. Therefore, this study proposes a draft guideline for Japan's pharmaceutical industry to manage drug shortages effectively. The Japanese government needs to establish a framework system that will enable pharmaceutical companies to effectively maintain a stable supply based on the proposals developed in this study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Access to medicines is a critical aspect of healthcare, and health technology assessment (HTA) agencies play a pivotal role in evaluating innovative medicines. Objectives: The objective of this study was to critically review Health Technology Assessment (HTA) recommendations for innovative medicines across the United Kingdom (England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland) following their licensure by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) in 2017. By analysing HTA recommendations, we aimed to understand differences between licensing and reimbursement recommendations and explore variations in access to innovative treatments within the UK. Methods: The study focused on HTA decisions made between 2017 and 2020 in the UK for innovative medicines that were licensed by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) in 2017. Published documents were used for the analysis. The decisions were categorized as 'recommend without restrictions', 'recommend with restrictions', 'not recommended' or 'not assessed'. Results: In 2017, the EMA approved licenses for 56 new innovative medicines. Between 2017 and January 2020, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in England completed the appraisal of 28 of these medicines. Out of the 28, 11 were 'recommended without restrictions', 15 were 'recommended with restrictions' and 2 were 'not recommended'. The majority of NICE recommendations (21 out of 26, or 81%) were made through managed access agreements. The Scottish Medicines Consortium (SMC) assessed 31 out of the 56 medicines licensed in 2017. Among these 31, 8 were 'recommended without any restriction', 22 were 'recommended with restrictions' and 1 was 'not recommended'. In Wales, the All Wales Medicines Strategy Group (AWMSG) follows NICE guidance and does not review a medicine if NICE is planning to assess it within the next 12 months. In Northern Ireland, HTA guidance from either NICE or SMC is followed, and a decision is adopted shortly after one of them makes its decision. In Northern Ireland, 39 recommendations were adopted from either NICE or SMC, including 10 without restrictions, 21 with restrictions and 8 not recommended decisions. Conclusions: This study sheds light on the complex landscape of medicine licensing and reimbursement in the UK. While licensing approval ensures safety and efficacy, it does not guarantee access to medicines without reimbursement recommendations. Health technology assessment (HTA) bodies play a crucial role in evaluating clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. Our findings reveal variations in HTA adoption across UK countries, emphasizing the importance of timely recommendations. Notably, 'recommendations with restrictions' prevail, often linked to managed access agreements. As we navigate this complex system, optimizing patient care remains paramount. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The similarity of current definitions of 'cross-resistance' and 'co-resistance' continues to cause confusion both in the scientific community as well as in understanding policies and in particular when looking at resistance from a risk assessment perspective. Further, lack of harmonized definitions of these terms in the regulatory space is challenging for interpretation. The purpose of this article is to: (i) provide an overview of the ambiguity in existing terminology related to cross-resistance, co-resistance and co-selection; (ii) emphasize the challenges created by the use of poor terminology in research and scientific literature; and (iii) propose a clear set of harmonized definitions that could be put into use through international regulatory agencies and institutions, such as the World Health Organization, Food and Drug Administration, European Medicines Agency, Center for Disease Control, Committee for Veterinary Medicinal Products, World Organization for Animal Health/Office International des Epizooties and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS) is the gold standard for removing basal cell carcinomas (BCCs) due to its ability to guarantee 100% margin evaluation through frozen section histopathology, offering the highest cure rate among current treatments. However, noninvasive imaging technologies have emerged as promising alternatives to clinical assessment for defining presurgical margins. This systematic scoping review examines the efficacy of these imaging modalities, focusing on those approved for clinical use by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) or the European Medicines Agency (EMA). A systematic search of EMBASE, Scopus, PubMed, and the Cochrane Public Library databases identified 11 relevant studies out of 2123 records, encompassing 644 lesions across five imaging techniques. The findings suggest that dermoscopy, high‐frequency ultrasound (HFUS), optical coherence tomography (OCT), line‐field optical coherence tomography (LC‐OCT), and reflectance confocal microscopy (RCM) show potential in detecting BCC margins, which could enhance MMS by providing better preoperative planning, informing patients of expected defect size, aiding in reconstruction decisions, and reducing overall procedure costs. This review discusses the benefits and limitations of each technique, offering insights into how these innovations could influence the future of BCC management. Emerging imaging techniques could enhance MMS by improving BCC margin assessment and reducing costs. Their adoption will depend on price and ease of use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Pamukkale Medical Journal is the property of Pamukkale Journal of Medicine 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.)

The European Medicines Agency adopted their Geriatric Medicines Strategy more than a decade ago. The strategy aims at elucidating the evidence basis for marketing authorization of new medicines which will be used in the older population, and at ensuring the appropriate communication of findings to the patient and healthcare provider. During the past decade new tools and data sources have emerged to support the strategy goals, and their use should be considered. Possible concrete actions are presented to improve the design of clinical trials, the data collection both pre‐ and post‐approval, the assessment of the findings, and the communication to assist informed prescription and safe medicine taking. Implementation and prioritization of these actions should be done from the perspective of addressing the needs of patients while maximizing efficient use of resources, with the aim of integrating geriatric aspects into routine medicines development and assessment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the European Geriatric Medicine Society's (EuGMS) view on improving drug evaluation in older patients as of September 2024. Topics covered include guidance on evaluating patients' frailty and morbidity status, the challenge of older subjects' heterogeneity in determining medication, and concerns on the choice of outcomes for them. Also noted is the need to consider outcomes that matter most to older people.

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]

Background: The new EU Medical Device Regulation (MDR) places greater importance on the role of clinical evidence to establish safety and performance. Article 54 of the MDR calls for expert committees to independently review the scientific, technical, and clinical evidence supporting the market authorization of certain novel devices independently from the established process of Notified Body reviews. These experts provide a review and opinion that ultimately is taken into consideration alongside the information reviewed by the Notified Body during the review process. Four expert committees (General and Plastic Surgery and Dentistry; Orthopaedics, Traumatology, Rehabilitation, Rheumatology; Circulatory System; and Neurology) have published at least one Scientific Opinion (SO) under the Clinical Evaluation Consultation Procedure (CECP) in 2021–2022. Methods: The four expert committees with published CECP opinions were reviewed to assess the academic backgrounds and professional expertise of each member with respect to clinical, technical, and biological domains on a 0–2 scale for each domain. A content review was conducted on the 10 CECP opinions published by these committees to assess their consistency with the goals and outcome expectations set by the MDR. The extent of content related to each of the clinical, technical, and biological domains was also assessed on a 0–2 scale. Results: All committees were composed primarily by members with strong clinical expertise, but only a few had strong technical and biological expertise. Across committees, the average scores of members related to academic background and professional expertise both ranged from 1.64 to 2.00 in the clinical domain, but only 0–0.15 and 0.15–0.69, respectively, in the biological domain, and 0.12–0.55 and 0.23–0.73, respectively, in the technical domain. A content review for the 10 SOs showed that all opinions focused exclusively or primarily on the clinical evidence. Three contained a modest amount of additional text directed at technical/engineering issues and five at biological issues. Conclusion: Expert committees are composed predominantly of expert clinical reviewers but have many fewer members with significant technical or biological expertise. This may limit the ability of the committees to evaluate the significant technical and biological risks that are often best understood by preclinical testing. Broadening the expertise across the committees may improve the depth of their benefit/risk critiques. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Remote Assessment of Disease and Relapse – Alzheimer's Disease (RADAR-AD) consortium evaluated remote measurement technologies (RMTs) for assessing functional status in AD. The consortium engaged with the European Medicines Agency (EMA) to obtain feedback on identification of meaningful functional domains, selection of RMTs and clinical study design to assess the feasibility of using RMTs in AD clinical studies. We summarized the feedback and the lessons learned to guide future projects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Importance Mitotane (Lysodren, o , p '-DDD [1-(o -chlorophenyl)-1-(p -chlorophenyl)-2,2-dichloroethane)] is currently the only United States Food and Drug Administration and European Medicines Agency-approved product for the treatment of adrenocortical carcinoma. Observations Mitotane is challenging to administer; however, its toxicities (specifically adrenal insufficiency) are well known, and the management of adverse consequences has established approaches. While often viewed through the prism of a cytotoxic agent, it can also interfere with hormone production making it a valuable asset in managing functional ACC. A recently completed prospective trial has shed some light on its use in the adjuvant setting, but further clarity is needed. Many think mitotane has a role in the advanced or metastatic setting, although prospective data are lacking and retrospective analyses are often difficult to interpret. Conclusions and relevance When used carefully and thoughtfully, especially in patients with hormonal excess, mitotane is an important component of the treatment armamentarium for ACC. [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]

The list of standard abbreviations for JDS is available at adsa.org/jds-abbreviations-24. Nonstandard abbreviations are available in the Notes. Antimicrobial use (AMU) in Switzerland is above target and requires reduction, especially in dairy cattle. Measuring AMU is pivotal to identifying starting points for AMU reduction, and so are studies investigating its potential drivers in dairy farms worldwide. However, although AMU in dairy farms is high, studies estimating AMU specifically in tiestall farms are scarce. Tiestalls are a common housing system and their prevalence among dairy farms accounts to approximatively 73%, 41%, and 40% in Canada, the United States, and Switzerland, respectively. The objectives of this cross-sectional, retrospective observational study were to estimate AMU using the newly established Swiss national reporting system for AMU in livestock and to identify associated factors on Swiss tiestall dairy farms. We calculated the treatment incidence (TI) by using the European Medicines Agency methodology and their defined daily dose (DDD) and defined course dose (DCD) standards. Data on factors potentially associated with AMU were obtained through personal interviews with farm managers on 221 farms. Retrospectively, during a 1-year period, data on a total of 7,619 treatments were extracted from the national database. Associations between management factors and TI were analyzed using a generalized linear model with gamma distribution. The mean (± SD) overall TI was 5.46 DDD/cow-year (± 4.10 DDD/cow-year). Intramammary treatment during lactation accounted for highest TI (3.24 ± 3.16 DDD/cow-year), whereas dry-cow therapy accounted for lowest TI (0.44 ± 0.49 DCD/cow-year). We found that 5 of the investigated management factors were significantly associated with TI. Organic production (estimate = −2.16; 95% CI = −3.62 to −0.70) and herd size (estimate = −0.81; 95% CI = −1.23 to −0.39) were negatively associated with TI. Specific cow breeds (Brown Swiss estimate = 1.56; 95% CI = 0.45–2.68) and Holstein Friesian (estimate = 1.42; 95% CI = 0.03–2.82; reference: other breeds) and the use of hygienic powders on the lying area (estimate = 1.10; 95% CI = 0.04–2.17) were positively associated with TI. Overall, the Swiss national reporting system is a valuable tool for AMU estimation. Several herd characteristics and management factors were associated with AMU in tiestall farms. Further studies focusing on factors associated with AMU and which are amenable to intervention will help improve stewardship programs and subsequently reduce AMU in dairy cows. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Advancements in oncology have revolutionized cancer treatment, with new drugs being approved at different rates worldwide. Our objective was to evaluate the approval of new oncological drugs for solid tumors by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the European Medicines Agency (EMA), and the Brazilian Health Regulatory Agency (ANVISA) since 2008. Methods: Data were collected from public and online databases by searching for the date of submission, the date of the procedure, the date of approval, clinical indication, and drug characteristics. The distribution was tested using the Shapiro–Wilk, test and comparisons were made using the Mann–Whitney U test; the data are reported using median days and interquartile range (IQR1–IQR3). Results: In total, 104 new oncologic drugs for the treatment of solid tumors were approved by the three agencies: 98 by the FDA, 90 by the EMA, and 68 by ANVISA. The cancer types with the highest number of first indications were lung cancer (n = 24), breast cancer (n = 15), and melanoma (n = 15). Most approvals were for oral medications (n = 63) and tyrosine–kinase inhibitors or other small-molecule inhibitors (n = 54). Time to approval after submission was as follows: the FDA—224 days (167–285); the EMA—364 days (330–418); and ANVISA—403 days (276–636) (p < 0.00001 for the FDA to the EMA and the FDA to ANVISA). The difference between submission dates among the agencies was as follows: EMA–FDA: 24 days (0–85); ANVISA–FDA: 255 (114–632); and ANVISA–EMA: 260 (109–645). The difference in approval dates between the agencies was as follows: EMA–FDA: 185 days (59–319); ANVISA–FDA: 558 (278–957); and ANVISA–EMA: 435 days (158–918). Conclusions: New oncologic drugs are submitted to the FDA and EMA for approval on similar dates; however, the longer appraisal period by the EMA pushes the approval date for Europe to approximately 6 months later. The same steps at ANVISA delay the approval by 1.5 years. Such procedures cause a significant difference in available medications between these regions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Epidermolysis bullosa (EB) comprises rare genetic disorders characterized by skin and mucosal membrane blistering induced by mechanical trauma. Molecularly, pathogenic variants affect genes encoding proteins crucial for epidermal–dermal adhesion and stability. Management of severe EB is multidisciplinary, focusing on wound healing support, ensuring that patients thrive, and complication treatment. Despite extensive research over 30 years, novel therapeutic approaches face challenges. Gene therapy and protein therapy struggle with efficacy, while regenerative cell-based therapies show limited effects. Drug repurposing to target various pathogenic mechanisms has gained attention, as has in vivo gene therapy with drugs for dystrophic and junctional EB that were recently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medicines Agency (EMA). However, their high cost limits global accessibility. This review examines therapeutic advancements made over the past 5 years, exploiting a systematic literature review and clinical trial data. [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]

Background: Remimazolam, a novel intravenous benzodiazepine recently approved by both the European Medicines Agency and the Food and Drug Agency, shows considerable promise in clinical practice. Its pharmacodynamic profile closely resembles that of midazolam, while its pharmacokinetic properties are similar to those of remifentanil. While research in adult populations continues to accumulate, the pace of pediatric studies is not as significant. This scoping review aims to systematically examine published studies, clinical trials, observational research, case reports, and relevant literature to provide a comprehensive understanding of remimazolam in pediatric sedation and anesthesia. By synthesizing the gathered evidence, we aim to identify gaps in the literature, guide future research endeavors, and inform clinical practices. Methods: The review follows the guidelines outlined by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis for Scoping Review. A thorough search strategy was implemented across prominent peer‐reviewed databases, with focused efforts to identify relevant grey literature. All primary studies involving the use of remimazolam in pediatric populations were included in this review. Results: Eighteen studies were included in this analysis, comprising 2 randomized controlled trials, 4 prospective cohort trials, 12 case reports, and 692 children in total. Conclusion: This scoping review highlights the increasing interest in using remimazolam as a sedative or anesthetic for children. Although initial evidence indicates its effectiveness and safety, more research is necessary to fill knowledge gaps, establish standard protocols, and optimize its use in pediatric anesthesia and sedation. Addressing these challenges will enable clinicians to improve the quality of care and outcomes for pediatric patients undergoing sedation and anesthesia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Over the past decades, US Congress enabled the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to facilitate and expedite drug development for serious conditions filling unmet medical needs with five special designations and review pathways: orphan, fast track, accelerated approval, priority review, and breakthrough therapy. Objectives: This study reviews the FDA's five special designations for drug development regarding their safety, efficacy/clinical benefit, clinical trials, innovation, economic incentives, development timelines, and price. Methods: We conducted a keyword search to identify studies analyzing the impact of the FDA's special designations (orphan, fast track, accelerated approval, priority review, and breakthrough therapy) on the safety, efficacy/clinical benefit, trials, innovativeness, economic incentives, development times, and pricing of new drugs. Results were summarized in a narrative overview. Results: Expedited approval reduces new drugs' time to market. However, faster drug development and regulatory review are associated with more unrecognized adverse events and post-marketing safety revisions. Clinical trials supporting special FDA approvals frequently use small, non-randomized, open-label designs. Required post-approval trials to monitor unknown adverse events are often delayed or not even initiated. Evidence suggests that drugs approved under special review pathways, marketed as "breakthroughs", are more innovative and deliver a higher clinical benefit than those receiving standard FDA approval. Special designations are an economically viable strategy for investors and pharmaceutical companies to develop drugs for rare diseases with unmet medical needs, due to financial incentives, expedited development timelines, higher clinical trial success rates, alongside greater prices. Nonetheless, patients, physicians, and insurers are concerned about spending money on drugs without a proven benefit or even on drugs that turn out to be ineffective. While European countries established performance- and financial-based managed entry agreements to account for this uncertainty in clinical trial evidence and cost-effectiveness, the pricing and reimbursement of these drugs remain largely unregulated in the US. Conclusion: Special FDA designations shorten clinical development and FDA approval times for new drugs treating rare and severe diseases with unmet medical needs. Special-designated drugs offer a greater clinical benefit to patients. However, physicians, patients, and insurers must be aware that special-designated drugs are often approved based on non-robust trials, associated with more unrecognized side effects, and sold for higher prices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cluster headache, characterised by attacks of severe, recurrent, unilateral headache and ipsilateral cranial autonomic symptoms, remains a primary headache with an elusive pathophysiology. Recent advances have introduced effective treatments and broadened understanding of the clinical features of cluster headache. These features are similar in patients globally, but regional differences in prevalence and burden exist. International collaborations have led to identification of eight genetic loci associated with cluster headache. The pathophysiological mechanisms are still not fully understood but recent studies show that targeting the trigeminal autonomic reflex by neurostimulation, or targeting the neuropeptide calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP), might lessen the attack burden. The US Food and Drug Administration has approved galcanezumab, a monoclonal antibody targeting CGRP, as the first specific preventive treatment for episodic cluster headache. However, a preventive effect was not replicated in chronic cluster headache, and the European Medicines Agency did not approve galcanezumab, restricting its availability in Europe. Owing to the low prevalence of cluster headache, continued collaboration through multicentre clinical trials and data sharing will be imperative for further breakthroughs in understanding and management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective To evaluate the ACR/EULAR 2022 criteria for ANCA-associated vasculitides (AAV) classification and compare them with the European Medicines Agency (EMA) algorithm and with classification based only on ANCA serology. Methods In the analysis, 374 cases (47% female) were classified according to the EMA algorithm, ANCA serology and ACR/EULAR criteria. The agreement rate was calculated using the kappa (κ) statistic. Results Under EMA, 192 patients were classified as granulomatosis with polyangiitis (GPA), 159 as microscopic polyangiitis (MPA) and 23 as eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (EGPA). The ACR/EULAR criteria classified 199 patients as GPA, 136 as MPA and 22 as EGPA. Four patients (1.1%) met criteria of two disease categories, and 13 (3.5%) were unclassifiable. The observed agreement between EMA and ACR/EULAR was 85% for GPA, 75% for MPA and 96% for EGPA. The unweighted κ statistic was 0.66 (95% CI: 0.60, 0.74). Of the 188 PR3-ANCA positive patients, 186 (98.9%) were classified as GPA using ACR/EULAR criteria, and 135 of 161 (83.9%) MPO-ANCA positive patients were classified as MPA. With a classification solely based on ANCA specificity, agreement with ACR/EULAR was 99% for GPA and 88% for MPA. Conclusions EMA and ACR/EULAR classification give similar results. A small proportion of patients cannot be classified or fall into two categories. Some patients exhibiting granuloma, a key feature of GPA, are nevertheless classified as MPA, conflicting with the current view of histopathology of AAV. There is high agreement of ANCA-based classification with that of ACR/EULAR, reflected in the considerable weight granted to ANCA in the new criteria. These crucial elements within the new criteria necessitate a consensus discussion among field experts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and purpose: This study was undertaken to highlight neonatal Fc receptor inhibition (efgartigimod) as a valuable therapeutic option for patients with refractory seronegative myasthenia gravis (MG) and to emphasize the concept that seronegative MG is greatly constrained by the limitations of currently available diagnostic methods and therapeutic measures. Methods: We describe the first refractory, generalized MG (gMG) patient successfully treated with efgartigimod after testing negative on standard autoantibody detection tests. Results: Our patient presented with severe fluctuating bulbar and generalized weakness, resulting in multiple myasthenic crises requiring intubation. After a 28‐year medical history of multiple failed lines of treatment, our patient was started on efgartigimod. Over five treatment cycles, a definite improvement in her clinical condition was observed (Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America class: IIIb to IIb; MG‐Activities of Daily Living score: 11 to 0; MG‐Quality of Life 15 score: 30 to 0; Quantitative MG score: 28 to 6). Standard autoantibody detection tests failed to detect known pathogenic autoantibodies, but cell‐based assay (CBA) identified autoantibodies against clustered adult acetylcholine receptor (AChR). Conclusions: In light of recent approvals of efgartigimod by the European Medicines Agency and US Food and Drug Administration exclusively for AChR‐positive gMG forms, our case highlights evidence suggesting that such an approach might be shortsighted and could limit therapeutic options for patients with refractory seronegative gMG. Additionally, introducing more sensitive analytical techniques, exemplified by CBA, may help bridge the gap between seronegative and seropositive patients. This represents an urgent unmet need for gMG patients, as the antibody profile dramatically influences the therapeutic approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

During the COVID-19 vaccination campaign, observed-to-expected analysis was used by the European Medicines Agency to contextualise data from spontaneous reports to generate real-time evidence on emerging safety concerns that may impact the benefit-risk profile of COVID-19 vaccines. Observed-to-expected analysis compares the number of cases spontaneously reported for an event of interest after vaccination ('observed') to the 'expected' number of cases anticipated to occur in the same number of individuals had they not been vaccinated. Observed-to-expected analysis is a robust methodology that relies on several assumptions that have been described in regulatory guidelines and scientific literature. The use of observed-to-expected analysis to support the safety monitoring of COVID-19 vaccines has provided valuable insights and lessons on its design and interpretability, which could prove to be beneficial in future analyses. When undertaking an observed-to-expected analysis within the context of safety monitoring, several aspects need attention. In particular, we emphasise the importance of stratified and harmonised data collection both for vaccine exposure and spontaneous reporting data, the need for alignment between coding dictionaries and the crucial role of accurate background incidence rates for adverse events of special interest. While these considerations and recommendations were determined in the context of the COVID-19 mass vaccination setting, they are generalisable in principle. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Remimazolam, a novel intravenous benzodiazepine recently approved by both the European Medicines Agency and the Food and Drug Agency, holds significant promise in clinical practice. Its pharmacodynamic profile closely mirrors that of midazolam, while its pharmacokinetics properties bear resemblance to remifentanil. Research in adult populations continues to accumulate, but the pediatric studies' pace is not significant. This scoping review aims to methodically scrutinize published studies, clinical trials, observational research, case reports, and pertinent literature to offer a comprehensive insight into the existing understanding of remimazolam in pediatric sedation and anesthesia. The synthesis of gathered evidence will discern lacunae in the literature, direct forthcoming investigations, and enlighten clinical practices. Methods: The review will adhere to the guidelines outlined by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis (PRISMA) for Scoping Review. A meticulous search strategy will be executed across prominent peer‐reviewed databases, with concerted efforts to identify relevant gray literature. All primary investigations involving the administration of remimazolam in pediatric populations will be encompassed within the scope of this review. Results: The encompassed studies will be elucidated through a narrative synopsis, complemented by descriptive statistical analyses of quantitative data where deemed applicable. Conclusion: The planned scoping review aims to delineate the existing evidence regarding the utilization of remimazolam in pediatric anesthesia and sedation. It will discern areas of knowledge deficiency, provide guidance for future inquiries, and enhance clinical practices within the field. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Pharmaceutical regulation on a global scale is a complex process, with regulatory bodies overseeing various aspects, including licensing, registration, manufacturing, marketing, and labeling. Among these, the USFDA plays a crucial role in upholding public health. The pharmaceutical industry contributes significantly to well-being by developing and distributing therapeutic agents. The journey of evaluating new pharmaceuticals involves meticulous examination through several phases, from safety and efficacy assessments to toxicity evaluation. Drug approval involves submitting New Drug Applications (NDAs) to regulatory agencies like the USFDA and EMA. However, disparities in durations contribute to the phenomenon known as "drug lag." This lag refers to delays in a pharmaceutical product's availability in one market compared to another. Addressing this issue is crucial, given its impact on patient access to treatments. Method: This study aims to analyze the extent of drug lag, focusing on newly approved oncology targeted therapies in Saudi Arabia, the United States, and the European Union. Data for cancer treatments authorized by the USFDA, EMA, and SFDA from January 1, 1997, to December 31, 2022, were collected from regulatory agency websites. The data sources included authorization letters, prescription information, and evaluation documents. We conducted a comparative assessment of drug lag for approved oncology targeted therapies between Saudi Arabia, the US, and the EU. Result: Our analysis identified 135 newly approved oncology-targeted drugs within the specified timeframe. Of these, 71 received approval in all three regions, while disparities were evident in others. The USFDA consistently had the highest number of approved drugs, with 98.5% of drugs initially approved there. In contrast, Saudi Arabia had the lowest number of approved drugs and a significantly longer median drug lag, indicating substantial delays in drug availability. Conclusion: This study highlights the significance of mitigating drug lag to enhance global healthcare outcomes and patient access to innovative therapies. Further research and collaborative efforts are essential to bridging these disparities and promoting equitable healthcare worldwide. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the Netherlands, drug regulatory science is a vibrant national and internationally oriented community. In this review, we present the factors that have contributed to this successful collaboration between relevant stakeholders and that led to a surge of activities around how regulatory science became embedded in the ecosystem of medicines research, clinical pharmacology, policymaking and regulation. We distinguished three pivotal episodes: (i) TI Pharma Escher‐project, (ii) Dutch Medicines Evaluation Board as catalyst of the big jump, and (iii) Regulatory Science Network Netherlands and multistakeholder engagement. The research agenda has been influenced by the dynamic evolution of legal frameworks in Europe, such as the EU orphan medicines legislation of 2001 and the EU pharmacovigilance legislation of 2012. All these developments have inspired and have raised pertinent regulatory sciences questions. Furthermore, clinical pharmacology as a discipline has been very influential in shaping regulatory science, contributing to discussions on the level of clinical evidence that is necessary to justify marketing approval of a new medicine. With a growing interest of multiple parties such as academics, European Medicines Agency, national agencies, patient organizations and EFPIA, connecting regulatory science activities is key. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The European Medicines Agency (EMA) and European national/regional health technology assessment (HTA) organizations consider the availability of existing treatments when evaluating a new drug. Since disagreement about the availability of alternative treatments may impact patient access to new drugs, this study aimed to investigate whether the EMA and HTA organizations agreed on the availability of alternative treatments and whether a lack of alternative treatments was associated with HTA organizations' added benefit assessment outcomes. For 97 innovative drugs authorized in 2019–2021 (excluding vaccines and diagnostic tools), assessments by the EMA and AEMPS (Spain), AIFA (Italy), HAS (France), IQWiG/G‐BA (Germany), NICE (England and Wales), and ZIN (the Netherlands) were identified. Until 1 June 2022, 429 HTA drug‐indication combinations were identified for these 97 drugs, of which 205 exactly matched the EMA's indication. For those, the overall agreement between the EMA and HTA organizations on whether alternative treatments were available was 87%. The agreement of HTA organizations with the EMA on whether available treatments were either pharmacological on‐label, pharmacological off‐label, or non‐pharmacological was 87%, 21%, and 57%, respectively. For all 429 HTA drug‐indication combinations, absence of alternative treatments as considered by HTA organizations was associated with a higher chance to provide added benefit: risk ratio 1.8 (95%‐CI 1.4–2.3). In conclusion, although there was high overall agreement between the EMA and HTA organizations about whether alternative treatments exist, there were differences in the types of treatment considered. Parallel joint scientific consultations could inform drug developers about relevant alternative treatments to facilitate patient access to innovative drugs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although platform trials have many benefits, the complexity of these designs may result not only in increased methodological but also regulatory and ethical challenges. These aspects were addressed as part of the IMI project EU Patient‐Centric Clinical Trial Platforms (EU‐PEARL). We reviewed the available guidelines on platform trials in the European Union and the United States. This is supported and complemented by feedback received from regulatory interactions with the European Medicines Agency and the US Food and Drug Administration. Throughout the project we collected the needs of all relevant stakeholders including ethics committees, regulators, and health technology assessment bodies through active dialog and dedicated stakeholder workshops. Furthermore, we focused on methodological aspects and where applicable identified the corresponding guidance. Learnings from the guideline review, regulatory interactions, and workshops are provided. Based on these, a master protocol template was developed. Issues that still need harmonization or clarification in guidelines or where further methodological research is needed are also presented. These include questions around clinical trial submissions in Europe, the need for multiplicity control across the whole master protocol, the use of non‐concurrent controls, and the impact of different randomization schemes. Master protocols are an efficient and patient‐centered clinical trial design that can expedite drug development. However, they can also introduce additional operational and regulatory complexities. It is important to understand the different requirements of stakeholders upfront and address them in the trial. While relevant guidance is increasing, early dialog with relevant stakeholders can help to further support such designs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Oligonucleotide therapeutics (ONTs) represent a new modality with unique pharmacological and chemical properties that modulate gene expression with a high degree of target specificity mediated by complementary Watson‐Crick base pair hybridization. To date, the proarrhythmic assessment of ONTs has been influenced by International Conference on Harmonization (ICH) E14 and S7B guidance. To document current hERG/QTc evaluation practices, we reviewed US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) Approval Packages (source: PharmaPendium.com) and collated preclinical and clinical studies for 17 marketed ONTs. In addition, clinical QTc data from 12 investigational ONTs were obtained from the literature. Of the marketed ONTs, eight were tested in the hERG assay with no inhibitory effect identified at the top concentration (range: 34–3,000 μM) tested. Fourteen of the ONTs were evaluated in nonhuman primate cardiovascular studies with 11 of them in dedicated telemetry studies. No effect on QTc intervals were observed (at high exposure multiples) in all studies. Clinically, four ONTs were evaluated in TQT studies; an additional six ONTs were assessed by concentration‐QTc interval analysis, and six by routine safety electrocardiogram monitoring. None of the clinical studies identified a QTc prolongation risk; the same was true for the 12 investigational ONTs. A search of the FDA Adverse Event Database indicated no association between approved ONTs and proarrhythmias. Overall, the collective weight of evidence from 29 ONTs demonstrate no clinical proarrhythmic risk based on data obtained from ICH S7B/E14 studies. Thus, new ONTs may benefit from reduced testing strategies because they have no proarrhythmic risk, a similar cardiac safety profile as monoclonal antibodies, proteins, and peptides. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We causally analyzed whether being a member of the European Union (EU) and having access to a centralized marketing authorization procedure (centralized procedure [CP]) affects availability and time to launch of new pharmaceuticals. We employed multiple difference‐in‐differences models, exploiting the eastern enlargement of the EU as well as changes in the indications that fall within the compulsory or voluntary scope of the CP. Results showed that countries experienced a mean decrease in launch delay of 10.9 months (p = 0.004) after joining the EU. Effects were higher among pharmaceuticals that belong to indications that might voluntarily participate in the CP but are not obliged to. These are often financially less attractive to manufacturers than pharmaceuticals within the compulsory scope. Availability of new pharmaceuticals launched remained unaffected. We found signs that the magnitude of the country‐specific effect of centralized marketing authorization on launch delay may be influenced by strategic decisions of manufacturers at the national level (e.g., parallel trade or reference pricing). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ABSTRACTThe ‘Antibodies to Watch’ article series provides an annual summary of commercially sponsored monoclonal antibody therapeutics currently in late-stage clinical development, regulatory review, and those recently granted a first approval in any country. In this installment, we discuss key details for 16 antibody therapeutics granted a first approval in 2023, as of November 17 (lecanemab (Leqembi), rozanolixizumab (RYSTIGGO), pozelimab (VEOPOZ), mirikizumab (Omvoh), talquetamab (Talvey), elranatamab (Elrexfio), epcoritamab (EPKINLY), glofitamab (COLUMVI), retifanlimab (Zynyz), concizumab (Alhemo), lebrikizumab (EBGLYSS), tafolecimab (SINTBILO), narlumosbart (Jinlitai), zuberitamab (Enrexib), adebrelimab (Arelili), and divozilimab (Ivlizi)). We briefly review 26 product candidates for which marketing applications are under consideration in at least one country or region, and 23 investigational antibody therapeutics that are forecast to enter regulatory review by the end of 2024 based on company disclosures. These nearly 50 product candidates include numerous innovative bispecific antibodies, such as odronextamab, ivonescimab, linvoseltamab, zenocutuzumab, and erfonrilimab, and antibody–drug conjugates, such as trastuzumab botidotin, patritumab deruxtecan, datopotamab deruxtecan, and MRG002, as well as a mixture of two immunocytokines (bifikafusp alfa and onfekafusp alfa). We also discuss clinical phase transition and overall approval success rates for antibody therapeutics, which are crucial to the biopharmaceutical industry because these rates inform decisions about resource allocation. Our analyses indicate that these molecules have approval success rates in the range of 14–32%, with higher rates associated with antibodies developed for non-cancer indications. Overall, our data suggest that antibody therapeutic development efforts by the biopharmaceutical industry are robust and increasingly successful.

The EMA Qualification of Novel Methodologies procedure qualifies methods, technologies and methodologies within a well-defined context of use in a pharma R&D context based on the evaluation of the presented scientific rationale and submitted data. This policy brief analyses QoNM submissions providing policy messages and recommendations to stakeholders on how to better prepare qualification applications in this regard. The recommendations include: 1. Grounding validation strategy using a current standard measure or a distribution technique. 2. Accurately represent pertinent subgroups via accurate inclusion and exclusion criteria. 3. Establish a well-defined and specific CoU with clear descriptions of the use within a development program target population and disease stage. Lastly, it emphasizes role of the QoNM procedure in advancing medicine development methodologies within the EU.

While significant progress has been made in understanding and applying gene silencing mechanisms and the treatment of human diseases, there have been still several obstacles in therapeutic use. For the first time, ONPATTRO, as the first small interfering RNA (siRNA) based drug was invented in 2018 for treatment of hTTR with polyneuropathy. Additionally, four other siRNA based drugs naming Givosiran, Inclisiran, Lumasiran, and Vutrisiran have been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency for clinical use by hitherto. In this review, we have discussed the key and promising advances in the development of siRNA-based drugs in preclinical and clinical stages, the impact of these molecules in bacterial and viral infection diseases, delivery system issues, the impact of administration methods, limitations of siRNA application and how to overcome them and a glimpse into future developments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Liraglutide is a glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist used for the management of type 2 diabetes and obesity. It was the first GLP-1 receptor agonist to be approved by the US Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency for the treatment of obesity. To date, numerous skin adverse reactions to liraglutide have been reported, but data regarding hypersensitivity reactions are scarce, raising concerns about its safety and clinical management. We present the case of a 56-year-old female patient with class 3 obesity who was started on subcutaneous liraglutide (Saxenda) by her endocrinologist. One month after starting the aforementioned treatment, the patient presented well-defined, round, erythematous pruriginous plaques surrounding the injection site, around 24 hours after the drug administration. A liraglutide-induced, delayed-type hypersensitivity reaction was suspected, which could be subsequently confirmed by allergy testing and histopathological study. This paper explores the clinical use of liraglutide, the occurrence of hypersensitivity reactions, diagnosis, management, and implications for future research. Understanding and managing liraglutide hypersensitivity is crucial to ensuring the safety and efficacy of this medication. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Currently, four vaccines for COVID-19 have been licensed by the European Medicines Agency: two viral vector-based vaccines and two mRNA-based vaccines. Since their approval, several cutaneous reactions related to vaccination have been reported in the literature. Among these, viral reactivations are one of the most frequent. The aim of this article was to investigate the current literature regarding viral reactivations following COVID-19 vaccination, focusing attention on pityriasis rosea (PR), herpes zoster and herpes simplex. A comprehensive literature search using various databases was performed and we included metanalyses, reviews, letters to the editor, real-life studies, case series and reports. A total of 48 articles involving 2067 patients were selected. Of these, 32, 6 and 17 articles reported varicella zoster virus (VZV) reactivation (1758 patients), herpes simplex virus (HSV) (238 patients) onset and PR (71 patients), respectively (some articles discussed more than one of these three reactivations). Possible pathogenetic mechanisms underlying viral reactivation are still not understood. Also, the possible correlations between vaccination and viral reactivation should be clarified. Certainly, vaccination should not be discouraged. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Epinephrine autoinjectors (EAIs) are used for the treatment of severe allergic reactions in a community setting; however, their utility is limited by low prescription fulfillment rates, failure to carry, and failure to use due to fear of needles. Given that delayed administration of epinephrine is associated with increased morbidity/mortality, there has been a growing interest in developing needle-free, easy-to-use delivery devices. neffy (epinephrine nasal spray) consists of three Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved components: epinephrine, Intravail A3 (absorption enhancer), and a Unit Dose Spray (UDS). neffy's development pathway was established in conjunction with the FDA and the European Medicines Agency and included multiple clinical trials to evaluate pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic responses under a variety of conditions, such as self-administration and allergic and infectious rhinitis, as well as an animal anaphylaxis model of severe hypotension, where neffy demonstrated a pharmacokinetic profile that is within the range of approved injection products and a pharmacodynamic response that is as good or better than injections. The increased pulse rate (PR) and blood pressure (BP) observed even one minute following the administration of neffy confirm the activation of α and β adrenergic receptors, which are the key components of epinephrine's mechanism of action. The results suggest that neffy will provide a safe and effective needle-free option for the treatment of severe allergic reactions, including anaphylaxis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The demonstration of bioequivalence proposed in the European Medicines Agency's (EMA's) draft guideline for topical products with the same qualitative and quantitative composition requires the confirmation of the internal structure equivalence. The impact of the shelf-life on the parameters proposed for internal structure comparison has not been studied. The objectives of this work were: (1) to quantify the effect of the time since manufacturing on the mean value and variability of the parameters proposed by the EMA to characterize the internal structure and performance of topical formulations of a complex topical formulation, and (2) to evaluate the impact of these changes on the assessment of the microstructure equivalence. A total of 5 batches of a topical emulgel containing 1% diclofenac diethylamine were evaluated 5, 14, and 23 months after manufacture. The zero-shear viscosity (η0), viscosity at 100 s−1 (η100), yield stress (σ0), elastic (G′) and viscous (G″) moduli, internal phase droplet size and in vitro release of the active ingredient were characterized. While no change in variability over time was detected, the mean value of all the parameters changed, especially the droplet size and in vitro release. Thus, combining data from batches of different manufacturing dates may compromise the determination of bioequivalence. The results confirm that to assess the microstructural similarity of complex formulations (such as emulgel), the 90% confidence interval limit for the mean difference in rheological and in vitro release parameters should be 20% and 25%, respectively. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Atopic dermatitis (AD) represents the most common skin disease characterized by heterogeneous endophenotypes and a high disease burden. In Europe, six new systemic therapies for AD have been approved: the biologics dupilumab (anti‐interleukin‐4 receptor (IL‐4R) α in 2017), tralokinumab (anti‐IL‐13 in 2021), lebrikizumab (anti‐IL‐13 in 2023), and the oral janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors (JAKi) targeting JAK1/2 (baricitinib in 2020 in the EU) or JAK1 (upadacitinib in 2021 and abrocitinib in 2022). Herein, we give an update on new approvals, long‐term safety, and efficacy. Upadacitinib and abrocitinib have the highest short‐term efficacy among the approved systemic therapies. In responders, dupilumab and tralokinumab catch up regarding long‐term efficacy and incremental clinical benefit within continuous use. Recently, the European Medicines Agency has released recommendations for the use of JAKi in patients at risk (cardiovascular and thromboembolic diseases, malignancies, (former) smoking, and age ≥65 years). Furthermore, we give an overview on emerging therapies currently in Phase III trials. Among the topical therapies, tapinarof (aryl hydrocarbon receptor), ruxolitinib (JAK1/2i), delgocitinib (pan‐JAKi), asivatrep (anti‐transient receptor potential vanilloid), and phosphodiesterase‐4‐inhibitors (roflumilast, difamilast) are discussed. Among systemic therapies, current data on cord‐blood‐derived mesenchymal stem cells, CM310 (anti IL‐4Rα), nemolizumab (anti‐IL‐31RA), anti‐OX40/OX40L‐antibodies, neurokinin‐receptor‐1‐antagonists, and difelikefalin (κ‐opioid‐R) are reported. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The classification of ageing as a disease is fundamental to developing new pharmacological strategies that can target said phenomenon. The European Medicines Agency does not do this and maintains a questionable perspective based on the traditional naturalistic argument and the value‐free ideal. An alternative is proposed which, inspired by consequentialism, is committed to considering ageing as a disease in European regulatory contexts as long as the ethical consequences are desirable. Within a realistic framework, I show that making this decision would have moderate positive effects such as increased knowledge about antiageing pharmacology or potential greater chances of completing vital projects. Furthermore, we will see that the main arguments used by critics to show that the negative effects outweigh the positive ones are not sound. Therefore, I conclude that it would be beneficial for the European Medicines Agency to change its position on ageing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Fluoroquinolones (FQs) are widely used in the management of several bacterial infections including urinary tract infections (UTIs), upper respiratory tract infections (URTIs), lower respiratory tract infections (LRTIs), skin and soft tissue, gastrointestinal tract infections (GITIs), and many other infections. Objective This review article focuses on some serious side effects notified by United States Food and Drug Administration (US FDA) in different warning statements. Methods The literature was searched, in databases such as Medline/PubMed/PMC, Google Scholar, Science Direct, Ebsco, Scopus, Web of science, Embase, and reference lists to identify publications relevant to the serious side effects associated with the use of FQs. Results Several epidemiological studies and meta-analyses have documented the occurrence of serious side effects of FQs including tendinopathy, peripheral neuropathy, aortic aneurysm/dissection, hypoglycemia, QT prolongation, retinal detachment, and worsening of myasthenia gravis. Conclusion The clinicians should be aware of serious side effects of FQs. The US FDA and European Medicines Agency recommend against the use of FQs as first-line therapies to treat infections such as acute sinusitis, acute bronchitis, and uncomplicated UTIs, as the risks outweigh the benefits. The risk of incidence of serious side effects of FQs is higher among patients with advanced age, renal insufficiency, and certain concomitant medications. To avoid occurrence of any serious side effects of FQs, the clinicians should prefer non-FQ antibacterial drugs to manage uncomplicated UTIs, respiratory tract infections, and other infections for which alternatives available. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) is the leading genetic cause of infant mortality, characterized by progressive neuromuscular degeneration resulting from mutations in the survival motor neuron (SMN1) gene. The availability of disease-modifying therapies for SMA therapies highlights the pressing need for easily accessible and cost-effective blood biomarkers to monitor treatment response and for better disease management. Additionally, the wide implementation of newborn genetic screening programs in Western countries enables presymptomatic diagnosis of SMA and immediate treatment administration. However, the absence of monitoring and prognostic blood biomarkers for neurodegeneration in SMA hinders effective disease management. Neurofilament light protein (NfL) is a promising biomarker of neuroaxonal damage in SMA and reflects disease progression in children with SMA undergoing treatment. Recently, the European Medicines Agency issued a letter of support endorsing the potential utilization of NfL as a biomarker of pediatric neurological diseases, including SMA. Within this review, we comprehensively assess the potential applications of NfL as a monitoring biomarker for disease severity and treatment response in pediatric-onset SMA. We provide reference ranges for normal levels of serum based NfL in neurologically healthy children aged 0–18 years. These reference ranges enable accurate interpretation of NfL levels in children and can accelerate the implementation of NfL into clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Modern immunotherapy approaches are revolutionizing the treatment scenario of relapsed/refractory (RR) multiple myeloma (MM) patients, providing an opportunity to reach deep level of responses and extend survival outcomes. Antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) and T-cell redirecting treatments, including bispecific antibodies (BsAbs) and chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cells therapy, have been recently introduced in the treatment of RRMM. Some agents have already received regulatory approval, while newer constructs, novel combinations, and applications in earlier lines of therapy are currently being explored. This review discusses the current landscape and possible development of ADCs, BsAbs and CAR-T cells immunotherapies. ADCs, BsAbs, and CAR-T therapy have demonstrated substantial activity in heavily pretreated, triple-class exposed (TCE) MM patients, and T-cell redirecting treatments represent new standards of care after third (European Medicines Agency, EMA), or fourth (Food and Drug Administration, FDA), line of therapy. All these three immunotherapies carry advantages and disadvantages, with different accessibility and new toxicities that require appropriate management and guidelines. Multiple on-going programs include combinations therapies and applications in earlier lines of treatment, as well as the development of novel agents or construct to enhance potency, reduce toxicity and facilitate administration. Sequencing is a challenge, with few data available and mechanisms of resistance still to be unraveled. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: To evaluate antibiotic prophylaxis in transrectal prostate biopsies due to the recommendation of the European Medicines Agency (EMA): We describe our single center experience switching from ciprofloxacin to fosfomycin trometamol (FMT) alone and to an augmented prophylaxis combining fosfomycin and trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole (TMP/SMX). Methods: Between 01/2019 and 12/2020 we compared three different regimes. The primary endpoint was the clinical diagnosis of an infection within 4 weeks after biopsy. We enrolled 822 men, 398 (48%) of whom received ciprofloxacin (group-C), 136 (16.5%) received FMT (group-F) and 288 (35%) received the combination of TMP/SMX and FMT (group-BF). Results: Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. In total 37/398 (5%) postinterventional infections were detected, of which 13/398 (3%) vs 18/136 (13.2%) vs 6/288 (2.1%) were detected in group-C, group-F and group-BF respectively. The relative risk of infectious complication was 1.3 (CI 0.7–2.6) for group-C vs. group-BF and 2.8 (CI 1.4–5.7) for group-F vs. group-BF respectively. Conclusion: The replacement of ciprofloxacin by fosfomycin alone resulted in a significant increase of postinterventional infections, while the combination of FMT and TMP/SMX had a comparable infection rate to FQ without apparent adverse events. Therefore, this combined regimen of FMT and TMP/SMX is recommended. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Hundreds of millions of doses of Praziquantel (PZQ) have been administered to persons with and without schistosomiasis living in schistosomiasis endemic settings, through the mass drug administration (MDA) strategy which started in the early 2000s. A recent publication suggested high risk of PZQ-related visual disorders, raising public health concerns. We aim to systematically synthesize evidence on the magnitude of PZQ-related visual disorders. Methods: We will search PubMed, Google Scholar, CINAHL, SCOPUS, CENTRAL and LILACS from 1977 (when the first human clinical trials on PZQ started) to 31st May 2024, with no language restrictions. The key search terms will include "Praziquantel", "PZQ", "visual disorder", "adverse events", "side effects", "blurry vision" and "visual impairment" together with alternative terms and synonyms. All the countries endemic for schistosomiasis will be included as search terms. We will also search HINARI, Africa Journals Online, Thesis Databases and Preprint Repositories. Where necessary, we will contact expert researchers working in the field of schistosomiasis, UNICEF/UNDP/World Bank/WHO Special Programme for Research and Training in Tropical Diseases (TDR), pharmaceutical industries, country-specific Food and Drug Authorities (FDAs) and the European Medicines Agency databases. We will search Conference Proceedings and reference lists of relevant studies for additional studies. At least two authors will independently select studies, extract data and assess risk of bias in the included studies. Any disagreements or discrepancies will be resolved through discussion between the reviewers. Heterogeneity will be explored graphically, and statistically using the I2-statistic. We will conduct random-effects meta-analysis when heterogeneity is appreciable, and express dichotomous outcomes (visual adverse events including excessive lacrimation, blurry vision and visual impairments) as risk ratio (RR) or Odds Ratio (OR) with their 95% confidence interval (CI). We will perform subgroup analysis to assess the impact of heterogeneity, and sensitivity analyses to test the robustness of the effect estimates. The overall level of evidence will be assessed using GRADE. Expected outcomes: The present review expects to identify and categorize visual disorders occurring after administration of PZQ, alone or in combination with other drugs. By synthesizing the data from multiple studies, the review aims to present a quantitative assessment of the risk or odds of experiencing a visual disorder in different populations after ingesting PZQ. The review will also generate insights into whether PZQ in combination with other drugs are associated with increased odds of visual disorders and whether the occurrence of visual disorders correlates with dosage or treatment duration. Policymakers, public health experts and stakeholders could rely on the review findings to deliver context-sensitive preventive chemotherapy programs by adjusting drug combinations or dosing schedules to reduce risk of visual adverse effects in populations treated with PZQ. The review aims to identify gaps in the current evidence regarding visual disorders following PZQ administration in schistosomiasis endemic settings which can serve as the basis for future research on important but unanswered questions. Dissemination and protocol registration: The findings of this study will be disseminated through stakeholder forums, conferences, and peer-review publications. The review protocol has been registered in the International Prospective Register for Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO)- CRD42023417963. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]