Dataset Information

How aligned are the perspectives of EU regulators and HTA bodies? A comparative analysis of regulatory-HTA parallel scientific advice.

ABSTRACT: In 2010, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) initiated a pilot project on parallel scientific advice with Health Technology Assessment bodies (HTABs) that allows manufacturers to receive simultaneous feedback from both the European Union (EU) regulators and HTABs on their development plans for medicines.The present retrospective qualitative analysis aimed to explore how the parallel scientific advice system is working and levels of commonality between the EU regulators and HTABs, and among HTABs, when applicants obtain parallel scientific advice from both a regulatory and an HTA perspective.We analysed the minutes of discussion meetings held at the EMA between 2010, when parallel advice was launched, and 1 May 2015, when the cutoff date for data extraction was set. The analysis was based on predefined criteria and conducted at two different levels of comparison: the answers of the HTABs vs. those of the regulators, and between the answers of the participating HTA agencies.The analysis was based on 31 procedures of parallel scientific advice. The level of full agreements was highest for questions on patient population (77%), while disagreements reached a peak for questions on the study comparator (30%). With regard to comparisons among HTABs, there was a high level of agreement for all domains.There is evident commonality, in terms of evidence requirements between the EU regulators and participating HTABs, as well as among HTABs, on most aspects of clinical development. Indeed, regardless of the question content, the analysis showed that a high level of overall agreement was reached through the process of parallel scientific advice.

SUBMITTER: Tafuri G

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5137821 | biostudies-other | 2016 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

How aligned are the perspectives of EU regulators and HTA bodies? A comparative analysis of regulatory-HTA parallel scientific advice.

Tafuri Giovanni G Pagnini Margherita M Moseley Jane J Massari Marco M Petavy Frank F Behring Antje A Catalan Arantxa A Gajraj Elangovan E Hedberg Niklas N Obach Mercè M Osipenko Leeza L Russo Pierluigi P Van De Casteele Marc M Zebedin Eva-Maria EM Rasi Guido G Vamvakas Spiros S

British journal of clinical pharmacology 20160701 4

<h4>Background</h4>In 2010, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) initiated a pilot project on parallel scientific advice with Health Technology Assessment bodies (HTABs) that allows manufacturers to receive simultaneous feedback from both the European Union (EU) regulators and HTABs on their development plans for medicines.<h4>Aims</h4>The present retrospective qualitative analysis aimed to explore how the parallel scientific advice system is working and levels of commonality between the EU regul ...[more]

PMID: 27245362

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:The substitution of bisphenol A (BPA) by bisphenol B (BPB), a very close structural analog, stresses the need to assess its potential endocrine properties. OBJECTIVE:This analysis aimed to investigate whether BPB has endocrine disruptive properties in humans and in wildlife as defined by the World Health Organization (WHO) definition used in the regulatory field, that is, a) adverse effects, b) endocrine activity, and c) plausible mechanistic links between the observed endocrine activity and adverse effects. METHODS:We conducted a systematic review to identify BPB adverse effects and endocrine activities by focusing on animal models and in vitro mechanistic studies. The results were grouped by modality (estrogenic, androgenic, thyroid hormone, steroidogenesis-related, or other endocrine activities). After critical analysis of results, lines of evidence were built using a weight-of-evidence approach to establish a biologically plausible link. In addition, the ratio of BPA to BPB potency was reported from studies investigating both bisphenols. RESULTS:Among the 36 articles included in the analysis, 3 subchronic studies consistently reported effects of BPB on reproductive function. In rats, the 28-d and 48-week studies showed alteration of spermatogenesis associated with a lower height of the seminiferous tubules, the alteration of several sperm parameters, and a weight loss for the testis, epididymis, and seminal vesicles. In zebrafish, the results of a 21-d reproductive study demonstrated that exposed fish had a lower egg production and a lower hatching rate and viability. The in vitro and in vivo mechanistic data consistently demonstrated BPB's capacity to decrease testosterone production and to exert an estrogenic-like activity similar to or greater than BPA's, both pathways being potentially responsible for spermatogenesis impairment in rats and fish. CONCLUSION:The available in vivo, ex vivo, and in vitro data, although limited, coherently indicates that BPB meets the WHO definition of an endocrine disrupting chemical currently used in a regulatory context. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP5200.

Project description:With the implementation of the new EU regulation on in vitro diagnostics (IVDR) in May 2022, notified bodies will be required to assess Companion Diagnostics (CDx). The EMA and national medicines agencies will be consulted on the performance and safety of CDx. In this paper, we report on our systematic review on how the EMA has dealt with CDx in dossiers for marketing authorization procedures, in 2017-2019, and in scientific advice procedures in 2016-2020, prior to the implementation of the new IVDR. Out of 167 medicines approved or refused by the EMA, CDx played a role for 20 medicines during assessment. Both European public assessment reports (EPARs) and the internal day 80 and day 120 assessment reports (ARs) of the EMA centralized marketing authorization procedures for these 20 medicines were analyzed in detail to determine how CDx were assessed. Likewise, in 46 of 159 cases in which scientific advice was provided, CDx were mentioned in the question-and-answer section of the scientific advice, and these were analyzed in an analogous manner. Our analysis indicates that clinical performance and analytical performance of the CDx were the most-discussed topics, being discussed 11 and seven times in the 20 EPARs and 59 and 29 times in the ARs, respectively. For scientific advice, clinical and analytical performance was discussed 65 and 22 times in the 46 retrieved mentions of scientific advice. Other aspects in relation to CDx were discussed as well, although at a lower frequency, in assessment reports and scientific advice. Overall, our analysis demonstrates that, despite the absence of an obligation from a legal point of view, EMA has gained experience on the assessment of CDx, most notably regarding its analytical and clinical performance. This experience may be useful in situations in which the EMA and national agencies of EU member states will formally be consulted by notified bodies regarding the performance and safety of CDx. In addition, the issues raised in the EPARs, ARs and scientific advice reports provide insight for applicants on aspects of CDx that need careful consideration.

Project description:BackgroundThere is a growing literature on the potential medical uses of Cannabis sativa and cannabinoid compounds. Although these have only been approved by regulatory agencies for a few indications, there is a hype about their possible benefits in a variety of conditions and a large market in the wellness industry. As in many cases patients search for information on cannabis products online, we have analyzed the information on medical cannabis available on the Internet. Therefore, this study aims at assessing the quality of the information available online on medical cannabis.MethodsWe searched "medical cannabis" on June 2019 using google.com and downloaded the first 243 websites. After excluding dead links or websites with no information about cannabis, 176 websites were included. They were then classified for their typology (e.g., commercial, government, news outlets). As an indicator of trustworthiness, we used the Journal of American Medical Association (JAMA) score, which assesses the indication of date, author, ownership of the website, and the presence of references. We also considered if a website is certified by Health-On-the-Net (HON), an independent organization, by displaying a HONCode symbol. Subsequently, we performed a content analysis to assess both the medical cannabis indications mentioned by webpages and the completeness of the information provided (whether they mentioned potential side effects and legal/regulatory issues or not).ResultsAnalyzing 176 webpages returned by a search engine, we found that 52% of them were news websites. Pain, epilepsy, and multiple sclerosis were the most frequently mentioned therapeutic areas (cited in 92, 84 and 80 webpages, respectively), which did not always match those for which there is regulatory approval. Information was also incomplete, with only 22% of the webpages mentioning potential side effects. Health portal websites provided the most complete information, with all of them (n = 7) reporting side effects. On average, 80% of webpages had a neutral stance on the potential benefits of medical cannabis, with commercial websites having more frequently a positive stance (67%).ConclusionsWe conclude that the information that can be found online is not always aligned in terms of the therapeutic areas for which science-based evidence is often still weak.

Dataset Information

How aligned are the perspectives of EU regulators and HTA bodies? A comparative analysis of regulatory-HTA parallel scientific advice.

Publications

How aligned are the perspectives of EU regulators and HTA bodies? A comparative analysis of regulatory-HTA parallel scientific advice.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets