TY - JOUR
T1 - Single-arm trials supporting the approval of anticancer medicinal products in the European Union
T2 - contextualization of trial results and observed clinical benefit
AU - Mulder, J.
AU - Teerenstra, S.
AU - van Hennik, P. B.
AU - Pasmooij, A. M.G.
AU - Stoyanova-Beninska, V.
AU - Voest, E. E.
AU - de Boer, A.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 The Authors
PY - 2023/4
Y1 - 2023/4
N2 - Background: Single-arm trials (SATs) can sometimes be used to support marketing authorization of anticancer medicinal products in the European Union. The level and durability of antitumor activity of the product as well as context are important aspects to determine the relevance of trial results. The aim of this study is to provide details on the contextualization of trial results and to evaluate the magnitude of benefit of medicinal products approved based on SATs. Materials and methods: We focused on anticancer medicinal products for solid tumors approved on the basis of SAT results (2012-2021). Data were retrieved from European public assessment reports and/or published literature. The benefit of these medicinal products was evaluated via the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO)-Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (MCBS). Results: Eighteen medicinal products were approved based on 21 SATs—few medicinal products were supported by >1 SAT. For the majority of clinical trials, a clinically relevant treatment effect was (pre)specified (71.4%) and most often an accompanying sample size calculation was provided. For 10 studies, each testing a different medicinal product, a justification for the threshold for a clinically relevant treatment effect could be identified. At least 12 out of 18 applications included information to facilitate the contextualization of trial results, including six supportive studies. Of the pivotal SATs analyzed (n = 21), three were assigned an ESMO-MCBS score of 4, which corresponds to ‘substantial’ benefit. Conclusions: The clinical relevance of the treatment effects shown by medicinal products for solid tumors tested in SATs is dependent on the effect size and context. To better facilitate regulatory decision making, prespecifying and motivating a clinically relevant effect and aligning the sample size to that effect is important. External controls may facilitate in the contextualization process, but the associated limitations must be addressed.
AB - Background: Single-arm trials (SATs) can sometimes be used to support marketing authorization of anticancer medicinal products in the European Union. The level and durability of antitumor activity of the product as well as context are important aspects to determine the relevance of trial results. The aim of this study is to provide details on the contextualization of trial results and to evaluate the magnitude of benefit of medicinal products approved based on SATs. Materials and methods: We focused on anticancer medicinal products for solid tumors approved on the basis of SAT results (2012-2021). Data were retrieved from European public assessment reports and/or published literature. The benefit of these medicinal products was evaluated via the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO)-Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (MCBS). Results: Eighteen medicinal products were approved based on 21 SATs—few medicinal products were supported by >1 SAT. For the majority of clinical trials, a clinically relevant treatment effect was (pre)specified (71.4%) and most often an accompanying sample size calculation was provided. For 10 studies, each testing a different medicinal product, a justification for the threshold for a clinically relevant treatment effect could be identified. At least 12 out of 18 applications included information to facilitate the contextualization of trial results, including six supportive studies. Of the pivotal SATs analyzed (n = 21), three were assigned an ESMO-MCBS score of 4, which corresponds to ‘substantial’ benefit. Conclusions: The clinical relevance of the treatment effects shown by medicinal products for solid tumors tested in SATs is dependent on the effect size and context. To better facilitate regulatory decision making, prespecifying and motivating a clinically relevant effect and aligning the sample size to that effect is important. External controls may facilitate in the contextualization process, but the associated limitations must be addressed.
KW - clinical benefit
KW - contextualization
KW - European Medicines Agency
KW - oncology
KW - single-arm trials
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85152109163&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.esmoop.2023.101209
DO - 10.1016/j.esmoop.2023.101209
M3 - Article
C2 - 37054504
AN - SCOPUS:85152109163
SN - 2059-7029
VL - 8
JO - ESMO Open
JF - ESMO Open
IS - 2
M1 - 101209
ER -