Dataset Information

Use of Titration as a Therapeutic Individualization Strategy: An Analysis of Food and Drug Administration-Approved Drugs.

ABSTRACT: Selecting a dose regimen that is both safe and effective for patients is one of the most critical elements of a successful drug development program. Titrating the dose regimen of a drug based on patient response may help to identify safe and effective dosages at the individual patient level. Therefore, we quantified and characterized the use of response-guided titration for drugs recently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to assess how frequently this dosing strategy is used and how titration regimens are evaluated during drug development. Most of the 181 drugs approved from 2013-2017 (78%) had only one approved dosing regimen. Only 30 of 76 (39%) drugs that were considered amenable to response-guided dosing strategies had information in labeling about such strategies. These findings indicate that although response-guided titration can be found in labeling, this strategy is used in a minority of drugs for which it may be useful. Careful consideration should be made early in drug development as to whether a new drug is amenable to response-guided titration as an approach to reducing interpatient variability.

SUBMITTER: Schuck RN

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6510374 | biostudies-literature | 2019 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Use of Titration as a Therapeutic Individualization Strategy: An Analysis of Food and Drug Administration-Approved Drugs.

Schuck Robert N RN Pacanowski Michael M Kim Sarah S Madabushi Rajanikanth R Zineh Issam I

Clinical and translational science 20190312 3

Selecting a dose regimen that is both safe and effective for patients is one of the most critical elements of a successful drug development program. Titrating the dose regimen of a drug based on patient response may help to identify safe and effective dosages at the individual patient level. Therefore, we quantified and characterized the use of response-guided titration for drugs recently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to assess how frequently this dosing strategy is used ...[more]

PMID: 30791226

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe cost of new anticancer drugs is rising. We aimed to assess the clinical benefit and price of anti-cancer drugs approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for advanced gastrointestinal cancers.MethodsDrugs approved between 2006 and 2017 for advanced GI malignancies were identified from FDA.gov, and their updated supporting trial data were searched. Incremental clinical benefit was quantified by using ESMO Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale version 1.1 (grade 0-5) and ASCO Value Framework version 2 (score range -20 to 180). Higher scores indicate larger net benefit, and substantial benefit was defined as score 4 or 5 by the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO). The Micromedex REDBOOK was used to estimate the monthly average wholesale price (AWP) and total drug price (TDP) over the median treatment duration per patient. Clinical benefit, AWP and TDP of each drug class were assessed.ResultsIn total, 16 GI cancer drugs received FDA approval for 24 indications, including five monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), five oral targeted therapies (TT), two immunotherapeutics (IO), three cytotoxic chemotherapies (CT), and one recombinant fusion protein (aflibercept). Most supporting trials (82%) reported overall survival benefit of less than 3 months and no significant improvement in quality of life. Only five agents (including one TT and one IO) with 21% the of approved indications met the ESMO's threshold of substantial clinical benefit. Median incremental benefit scores of TT and IO were comparable to other drug classes. However their median TDP was much higher at $153 402 and $98 208, respectively, compared to $30 330 USD per patient for CT. The estimated TDP did not correlate with clinical benefit scores.ConclusionMost FDA-approved gastrointestinal cancer drugs do not meet the ESMO threshold of substantial clinical benefit. TT and IO are estimated to carry significant drug costs, and further cost analysis of these drugs is urgently needed.

Project description:BackgroundPostmarketing commitments are clinical studies that pharmaceutical companies agree to conduct at the time of FDA approval, but which are not required by statute or regulation. As FDA increasingly adopts a lifecycle evaluation process, greater emphasis will be placed on postmarket evidence as a component of therapeutic evaluation. Therefore, the objectives of this study were to determine how often postmarketing commitments agreed upon by pharmaceutical companies at first FDA approval lead to new clinical trials and to establish the characteristics and rates of completion and dissemination of postmarketing commitments.MethodsFor new drugs and biologics approved in 2009-2012, we used public FDA documents, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Scopus, to determine postmarketing commitments and their characteristics known at the time of FDA approval; number subject to reporting requirements, for which FDA is required to make study status information available to the public ("506B studies"), and their statuses; and rates of registration and results reporting on ClinicalTrials.gov and publication in peer-reviewed journals for all clinical trials.ResultsAmong 110 novel drugs and biologics approved by the FDA between 2009 and 2012, 61 (55.5%) had at least one postmarketing commitment at the time of first approval. Of 331 total postmarketing commitments, 33 (10.0%) were for new clinical trials; 27 of these were 506B studies subject to public reporting requirements, of which 12 (44.4%) did not have a recent (i.e., up-to-date) or closed (i.e., fulfilled or released) status provided publicly by the FDA. Although two postmarketing commitments were insufficiently described in FDA records to perform searches on ClinicalTrials.gov, nearly all (28, 90.3%) of the 31 remaining postmarketing commitments for new clinical trials were registered on ClinicalTrials.gov. Among the registered trials, 23 (23 of 28, 82.1%) were classified as completed or terminated, of which 22 (95.7%) had reported results. When considering all 29 completed or terminated clinical trials, registered or unregistered on ClinicalTrials.gov, only half (14, 48.3%) were published in peer-reviewed journals.ConclusionsWhile only 15% of postmarketing commitments agreed to by pharmaceutical companies at the time of FDA approval were for new clinical trials, these trials were nearly always registered with reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov. However, only half were published, and despite FDA public reporting requirements, recent status information was often unavailable for 506B studies.

Dataset Information

Use of Titration as a Therapeutic Individualization Strategy: An Analysis of Food and Drug Administration-Approved Drugs.

Publications

Use of Titration as a Therapeutic Individualization Strategy: An Analysis of Food and Drug Administration-Approved Drugs.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets