Late Phase Studies Benefit from EDC - Applied Clinical Trials

ADVERTISEMENT

See our 2013 Buyers Guide Digital Edition.
Late Phase Studies Benefit from EDC Today's Web-based systems can improve the quality of data at a reasonable cost to sponsors.

Source: Supplements


(Photography: Jim Shive)
Along with the growing requirements for postmarketing studies is a growing glossary of terms to describe Phase IV clinical trials, patient registries, observational studies, and other research conducted after a treatment's approval. For simplicity, this article will, for the most part, refer to these as "Late Phase" studies, which life science companies are increasingly called on to conduct.

The demands of these studies are many, and include:lifecycle management of patented drugs; real world Phase IV trials following accelerated drug approvals; long-term safety evaluations; stepped-up regulations in the United States, EU, Japan, and other regions; and a need for effectiveness data for reimbursement by public and private payers. This leads to a major question facing sponsors: How to navigate today's demands while containing costs?

Technology savvy life science companies are looking to technology for help. Many are assessing Web-based EDC, now widely used in Phases I–III clinical studies. In addition to the obstacles to EDC adoption faced in earlier phases—ensuring system access, high data quality, and regulatory compliance—Late Phase research presents additional requirements. Notably, it is most frequently conducted in community settings as opposed to specialized academic institutions. But busy physician practices do not have the infrastructure to learn complex technologies; instead, they require intuitive, easy-to-use data entry methods.

In addition, Late Phase research often involves smaller subject-to-site ratios, with data collected at a large number of sites to ensure ability to generalize results. Hence, the costs for setting up, training, and supporting sites have to be lower than in clinical development research—otherwise these Late Phase studies would be cost prohibitive.

Finally, and also due to the need for real-world data reflective of actual treatment patterns, an increasing number of Late Phase trials and registries are conducted on a global basis. As such, these studies require an ability to have a common database across different countries and languages (allowing for minor local differences) to facilitate the logistics and analysis of data.

These Late Phase requirements, often coupled with the need for long-term subject follow-up, once made automated data collection at the site level cost prohibitive. Sponsors were stuck between the anvil and the hammer: Either simplify the research questions at the risk of not learning anything of value, or take the risk of collecting ultimately inconclusive data (too dirty, hard to pool, etc.).

It is the fundamental contention of this article that Web-based EDC technology is allowing sponsors to improve the quality of the data collected in Late Phase research within acceptable budget constraints. The article will explore the challenges and opportunities sponsors face as they embrace rapid change in Late Phase research and supporting EDC technology.

Key drivers of growth

Most sources suggest that Phase IV postmarket research is growing at around 20% annually, exceeding the growth rate of Phase II and III studies, and projected to have cost the industry more than $12 billion worldwide in 2007.1 Regulatory authorities around the world face a highly sensitized public that is concerned about the safety of marketed drugs and are seeking additional research from sponsors to evaluate real-world safety and effectiveness.2

Postmarketing studies also play an increasingly important role in overall lifecycle management to demonstrate the value of new therapies after commercialization and provide insight into new market opportunities, new subject populations, new indications, and competitive positioning. Similarly, public and private payers are also seeking more evidence-based research and outcomes data in real-world settings to make formulary and reimbursement decisions.3

Despite regulatory intent to impose postmarketing obligations, a large number of committed studies have either not been conducted at all or only carried out after significant delays—thereby defeating the very logic of early collection of real-world data to identify unknown safety concerns. For example, in the United States, the number of postmarketing commitments (PMCs) required by the FDA continues to increase by more than 75% of all New Chemical Entities (NCEs), partly spurred by increasing Fast Track Approvals and requests for pediatric population use. Yet more than 700 commitments still remain unmet4 due to a wide variety of scientific or ethical reasons and operational and budgetary obstacles.

Technology—specifically EDC—is the cornerstone of a successful strategy to facilitate data collection and subject tracking within reasonable cost.


ADVERTISEMENT

blog comments powered by Disqus

ADVERTISEMENT

UPCOMING CONFERENCES

8th Annual Forum on Transparency and Aggregate Spend 2014
Washington, DC
August 18-20, 2014

eSource Data in Clinical Investigations
Philadelphia, PA
August 20-21, 2014

Pharmacovigilance 2014
Philadelphia, PA
September 10-11, 2014

Collaborative Research Summit
Philadelphia, PA
October 15-16, 2014

See All Conferences >>

Survey
As it creates a plan to implement the US biosimilar pathway, should FDA:
Borrow heavily from EMA's pathway program?
Borrow lightly from EMA's pathway program?
Create entirely its own pathway program?
Borrow heavily from EMA's pathway program?
86%
Borrow lightly from EMA's pathway program?
7%
Create entirely its own pathway program?
7%
View Results
Untitled Document
Source: Supplements,
Click here