Applied Clinical Trials
It's hard enough to conduct clinical trials for experimental medicines, but it can be even more difficult when patients already have access to the medicine outside the research setting.
It's hard enough to conduct clinical trials for experimental medicines, but it can be even more difficult when patients already have access to the medicine outside the research setting. Thus the Food and Drug Administration should require post-market clinical studies, which expose patients to heightened risk, only if an important public health question is at stake and no other study design can supply needed evidence.
That's the conclusion of a report on "Ethical and Scientific Issues in Studying the Safety of Approved Drugs" published by the Institute of Medicine in May, which raises a number of important questions on this topic as part of its assessment of FDA policies for ensuring the safety of drugs through the product lifecycle.
FDA requested this IOM analysis in 2010 to help devise policies and programs to prevent future Vioxx-type safety crises. The expert panel issued a preliminary assessment in July 2010 to assist deliberations on drug safety issues by FDA advisory committees.
This final report outlines strategies for improving oversight of marketed drugs to better detect safety concerns. The panel advised FDA to create a comprehensive document that maps drug risks and safety concerns throughout the product life cycle, or benefit and risk assessment and management plan.
The proposal drew objections from agency officials, who claimed it would be "challenging" to develop a formal safety document for every approved drug, given the agency's limited resources, and that lengthy rule-making would probably be required to do so.
Much of the report discusses how FDA should weigh the need for post-market clinical trials and how such studies should be structured. FDA has required 385 post-market studies since 2008, according to a separate agency report. Post-approval research is most valid, the panel said, where benefits or risks of a drug are "particularly uncertain." That could apply to drugs approved based on surrogate endpoints that provide conflicting evidence about likely health outcomes; to first-in-class drugs with approval based on surrogate endpoints; and to drugs with troubling side effects that could affect a large number of people.
In deciding whether to require sponsors to conduct post-market studies, the experts emphasized that FDA must balance the need to guard against unsafe medicines against its ethical obligation to protect research participants.
Clinical studies should be required only if a regulatory decision cannot be made with existing safety evidence; if the research can reduce uncertainties about the benefit-risk balance of a medicine; if the results will support a decision in a timely fashion; and if the rights and interests of research participants can be protected. Asking individuals to accept additional risk, without any expectation of clinical benefit, is justified only when a pressing public health question is at stake, as when FDA has to decide whether to remove a drug from the market or restrict its use.
Even if post-market research is warranted, the experts acknowledged that such studies are not easy to conduct because patients may refuse to participate in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) once a medicine is readily available, and extensive patient self-selection can skew results.
Adherence also may be a problem, as well as early patient withdrawal from trials. When RCTs are justified, FDA should work with institutional review boards and data monitoring committees to ensure proper protection of participants' rights and interests. Active comparators should be used whenever possible, although placebo controls may be acceptable under certain circumstances.
Post-market studies should employ informed consent procedures that address the unique aspects of this research, such as the need to assess a specific safety signal.
The difficulties with post-market RCTs may increase reliance on observational studies, particularly to detect rare or delayed risks.
In anticipation of such a shift, the panel advises FDA to establish a new body to advise on the ethical challenges raised in observational studies and surveillance activities.
FDA also should clarify whether its human subject protection regulations apply to post-marketing observational studies and emphasize that it's important for investigators to ensure the security of patient information obtained from health system databases.
Using Patient Reported Outcomes in Dermatology Trials
April 25th 2024In part 3 of this video interview with ACT editor Andy Studna, Melissa Mooney, director, eCOA sales engineering, IQVIA sheds light on the unique challenges of dermatology trials and how clinical outcome assessments can be implemented in them.
Including Women of Childbearing Age in Clinical Research
March 26th 2024In recognition of International Women's Month, we're featuring this recent talk between Associate Editor Miranda Schmalfuhs and Marie Teil, Global Head of UCB’s Women of Childbearing Age Program. They speak about the specific challenges women with chronic illnesses face when accessing appropriate treatment and participating in clinical trials, UCB's Women of Childbearing Age Program and it’s most successful strategies, and much more.
Improving Engagement While Maintaining Data Integrity & Validity
March 19th 2024In recognition of Women's Health Month, we're featuring this recent talk between Associate Editor Miranda Schmalfuhs and uMotif's Chief Product Officer, Julia Lakeland, discuss new technologies improving patient engagement and reducing the emotional and logistical burdens of participation, ethical considerations that should be addressed when implementing those technologies, while ensuring patient privacy, and much more.
FDA Grants Ziftomenib with Breakthrough Therapy Designation for NPM1-Mutant Acute Myeloid Leukemia
April 23rd 2024Data from the Phase Ib portion of the KOMET-001 trial showed that the once-daily oral treatment may provide a substantial improvement over available therapies for relapsed/refractory NPM1-mutant acute myeloid leukemia.