期刊
BRITISH JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY
卷 87, 期 2, 页码 395-405出版社
WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/bcp.14425
关键词
benefit-risk assessment; decision analysis; drug regulation; EMA; FDA; MCDA
The recent benefit-risk framework developed by the FDA aims to improve the clarity and consistency in decision-making, but restricts the use of quantitative decision analysis approaches. In contrast, European regulators have been exploring the use of quantitative methods for evaluating drug benefit-risk balance.
The recent benefit-risk framework (BRF) developed by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is intended to improve the clarity and consistency in communicating the reasoning behind the FDA's decisions, acting as an important advancement in US drug regulation. In the PDUFA VI implementation plan, the FDA states that it will continue to explore more structured or quantitative decision analysis approaches; however, it restricts their use within the current BRF that is purely qualitative. By contrast, European regulators and researchers have been long exploring the use of quantitative decision analysis approaches for evaluating drug benefit-risk balance. In this paper, we show how quantitative modelling, backed by decision theory, could complement and extend the FDA's BRF to better support the appraisal of evidence and improve decision outcomes. After providing relevant scientific definitions for benefit-risk assessment and describing the FDA and European Medicines Agency (EMA) frameworks, we explain the components of and differences between qualitative and quantitative approaches. We present lessons learned from the EMA experience with the use of quantitative modelling and we provide evidence of its benefits, illustrated by a real case study that helped to resolve differences of judgements among EMA regulators.
作者
我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。
推荐
暂无数据