Abstract

PurposeKnowledge of the benefits and risks of new drugs is incomplete at the time of marketing approval. Registries offer the possibility for additional, post‐approval, data collection. For all new drugs, which were approved in the European Union between 2007 and 2010, we reviewed the frequency, the type, and the reason for requiring a registry.MethodsThe European Public Assessment Reports, published on the website of the European Medicine Agency, were reviewed for drugs approved by the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use. We searched for key characteristics of these drugs, including therapeutic area (ATC1 level), level of innovation (the score is an algorithm based on availability of treatment and therapeutic effect), and procedural characteristics. In addition, we identified if these registries were defined by disease (disease registry) or exposure to a single drug (drug registry).ResultsOut of 116 new drugs approved in the predefined period, for 43 (37%), 1 to 6 registry studies were identified, with a total of 73 registries. Of these 46 were disease registries and 27 (single) drug registries. For 9 drugs, the registry was a specific obligation imposed by the regulators. The level of innovation and the orphan status of the drugs were determinants positively predicting post‐approval registries (OR 10.3 [95% CI 1.0‐103.9] and OR 2.8 [95% CI 1.0‐7.5], respectively).ConclusionsThe majority of registries required by regulators are existing disease registries. Registries are an important and frequently used tool for post‐approval data collection for orphan and innovative drugs.

Highlights

  • Evidence regarding benefit and especially risks of drugs is still limited by the time they are approved by regulatory agencies

  • The level of innovation and the orphan status of the drugs were determinants positively predicting post‐approval registries

  • We examined the rationale underlying the decision to set up a registry

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Evidence regarding benefit and especially risks of drugs is still limited by the time they are approved by regulatory agencies. The number of patients exposed to the drug will be much larger, long‐term data will become available, and safety concerns that could not be detected during clinical trials may be identified. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in the USA and the European Medicine Agency (EMA) in Europe have developed extensive guidance for industry indicating how to address identified and potential safety concerns and how to deal with missing data.[2,3] These pharmacovigilance activities focus on monitoring real‐life clinical use, including the systematic collection of observational data in registries.

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call