TY - JOUR
T1 - Pre-approval and post-approval availability of evidence and clinical benefit of conditionally approved cancer drugs in Europe
T2 - a comparison with standard approved cancer drugs
AU - Bloem, Lourens T
AU - Bot, Rosalinde E
AU - Mantel-Teeuwisse, Aukje K
AU - van der Elst, Menno E
AU - Sonke, Gabe S
AU - Klungel, Olaf H
AU - Leufkens, Hubert G M
AU - Hoekman, Jarno
N1 - Funding Information:
The authors wish to thank dr. B.O. Fabriek (Dutch Medicines Evaluation Board, Utrecht, the Netherlands) for her contribution to the construction of the study cohort, and dr. N.I. Cherny (Shaare Zedek Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel) and Ms. N.J. Latino (European Society for Medical Oncology) for their insightful comments on how to apply the ESMO-MCBS.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 The Authors. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Pharmacological Society.
PY - 2022/5
Y1 - 2022/5
N2 - Aims: Cancer drugs are increasingly approved through expedited regulatory pathways including the European conditional marketing authorization (CMA). Whether, when taking CMA post-approval confirmatory trials into account, the level of evidence and clinical benefit between CMA and standard approved (SMA) drugs differs remains unknown. Methods: We identified all CMA cancer indications converted to SMA in 2006–2020 and compared these to similar SMA indications with regard to pivotal trial and CMA post-approval confirmatory trial design, outcomes and demonstrated clinical benefit (per the European Society for Medical Oncology Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale). We tested for differences in clinical benefit and whether substantial clinical benefit was demonstrated. To account for the clinical benefit of unconverted CMA indications, we performed sensitivity analyses. Results: We included 15 SMA and 15 converted CMA cancer indications (17 remained unconverted). Approval of 11 SMA (73%) and four CMA indications (27%) was supported by a controlled trial. Improved overall survival (OS) was demonstrated for four SMA indications (27%). Improved quality of life (QoL) was demonstrated for three SMA (20%) and one CMA indication(s) (7%). Of subsequent CMA post-approval confirmatory trials, 11 were controlled (79%), one demonstrated improved OS (7%) and five improved QoL (36%). After conversion, CMA indications were associated with similar clinical benefit (P =.31) and substantial clinical benefit as SMA indications (risk ratio 1.4, 95% confidence interval 0.57–3.4). Conclusion: While CMA cancer indications are initially associated with less comprehensive evidence than SMA indications, levels of evidence and clinical benefit are similar after conversion from CMA to SMA.
AB - Aims: Cancer drugs are increasingly approved through expedited regulatory pathways including the European conditional marketing authorization (CMA). Whether, when taking CMA post-approval confirmatory trials into account, the level of evidence and clinical benefit between CMA and standard approved (SMA) drugs differs remains unknown. Methods: We identified all CMA cancer indications converted to SMA in 2006–2020 and compared these to similar SMA indications with regard to pivotal trial and CMA post-approval confirmatory trial design, outcomes and demonstrated clinical benefit (per the European Society for Medical Oncology Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale). We tested for differences in clinical benefit and whether substantial clinical benefit was demonstrated. To account for the clinical benefit of unconverted CMA indications, we performed sensitivity analyses. Results: We included 15 SMA and 15 converted CMA cancer indications (17 remained unconverted). Approval of 11 SMA (73%) and four CMA indications (27%) was supported by a controlled trial. Improved overall survival (OS) was demonstrated for four SMA indications (27%). Improved quality of life (QoL) was demonstrated for three SMA (20%) and one CMA indication(s) (7%). Of subsequent CMA post-approval confirmatory trials, 11 were controlled (79%), one demonstrated improved OS (7%) and five improved QoL (36%). After conversion, CMA indications were associated with similar clinical benefit (P =.31) and substantial clinical benefit as SMA indications (risk ratio 1.4, 95% confidence interval 0.57–3.4). Conclusion: While CMA cancer indications are initially associated with less comprehensive evidence than SMA indications, levels of evidence and clinical benefit are similar after conversion from CMA to SMA.
KW - European Medicines Agency
KW - benefit–risk assessment
KW - clinical benefit
KW - clinical trials
KW - conditional marketing authorization
KW - drug regulation
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85122312346&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/bcp.15141
DO - 10.1111/bcp.15141
M3 - Article
C2 - 34779004
SN - 0306-5251
VL - 88
SP - 2169
EP - 2179
JO - British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology
JF - British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology
IS - 5
ER -