Source Of Real-world Evidence Research Articles

Patient listening on social media for patient-focused drug development: a synthesis of considerations from patients, industry and regulators.

Patients, life science industry and regulatory authorities are united in their goal to reduce the disease burden of patients by closing remaining unmet needs. Patients have, however, not always been systematically and consistently involved in the drug development process. Recognizing this gap, regulatory bodies worldwide have initiated patient-focused drug development (PFDD) initiatives to foster a more systematic involvement of patients in the drug development process and to ensure that outcomes measured in clinical trials are truly relevant to patients and represent significant improvements to their quality of life. As a source of real-world evidence (RWE), social media has been consistently shown to capture the first-hand, spontaneous and unfiltered disease and treatment experience of patients and is acknowledged as a valid method for generating patient experience data by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). While social media listening (SML) methods are increasingly applied to many diseases and use cases, a significant piece of uncertainty remains on how evidence derived from social media can be used in the drug development process and how it can impact regulatory decision making, including legal and ethical aspects. In this policy paper, we review the perspectives of three key stakeholder groups on the role of SML in drug development, namely patients, life science companies and regulators. We also carry out a systematic review of current practices and use cases for SML and, in particular, highlight benefits and drawbacks for the use of SML as a way to identify unmet needs of patients. While we find that the stakeholders are strongly aligned regarding the potential of social media for PFDD, we identify key areas in which regulatory guidance is needed to reduce uncertainty regarding the impact of SML as a source of patient experience data that has impact on regulatory decision making.

Caplacizumab (Cablivi)


 CADTH recommends that Cablivi should not be reimbursed by public drug plans for the treatment of adults with acquired thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (aTTP) in combination with plasma exchange (PE) and immunosuppressive therapy.
 Evidence from clinical trials were unable to demonstrate that Cablivi improved survival and quality of life, minimized organ damage, or prevented long-term aTTP recurrence. Although results showed that Cablivi reduced time to platelet normalization compared with placebo in patients with aTTP who received PE and immunosuppressive therapy, CADTH Canadian Drug Expert Committee was unable to determine how this correlated with the previously mentioned clinical outcomes.
 Evidence from an integrated analysis of clinical trials and several sources of real-world evidence were unable to clearly demonstrate whether Cablivi provides benefits when added to PE and immunosuppressive therapy due to limitations associated with the methodology.
 Based on the evidence reviewed, it remains uncertain whether Cablivi meets the needs identified by patients of improving survival and quality of life, preventing disease complications, reducing the need for PE, and preventing disease recurrence.

Defining the role of real-world data in cancer clinical research: The position of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer

The emergence of the precision medicine paradigm in oncology has led to increasing interest in the integration of real-world data (RWD) into cancer clinical research. As sources of real-world evidence (RWE), such data could potentially help address the uncertainties that surround the adoption of novel anticancer therapies into the clinic following their investigation in clinical trials. At present, RWE-generating studies which investigate antitumour interventions seem to primarily focus on collecting and analysing observational RWD, typically forgoing the use of randomisation despite its methodological benefits. This is appropriate in situations where randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are not feasible and non-randomised RWD analyses can offer valuable insights. Nevertheless, depending on how they are designed, RCTs have the potential to produce strong and actionable RWE themselves. The choice of which methodology to employ for RWD studies should be guided by the nature of the research question they are intended to answer. Here, we attempt to define some of the questions that do not necessarily require the conduct of RCTs. Moreover, we outline the strategy of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) to contribute to the generation of robust and high-quality RWE by prioritising the execution of pragmatic trials and studies set up according to the trials-within-cohorts approach. If treatment allocation cannot be left up to random chance due to practical or ethical concerns, the EORTC will consider undertaking observational RWD research based on the target trial principle. New EORTC-sponsored RCTs may also feature concurrent prospective cohorts composed of off-trial patients.

The Evolve to Next-Gen ACT Network: An evolving open-access, real-world data resource primed for real-world evidence research across the Clinical and Translational Science Award Consortium.

The ACT Network was funded by NIH to provide investigators from across the Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) Consortium the ability to directly query national federated electronic health record (EHR) data for cohort discovery and feasibility assessment of multi-site studies. NIH refunded the program for expanded research application to become "Evolve to Next-Gen ACT" (ENACT). In parallel, the US Food and Drug Administration has been evaluating the use of real-world data (RWD), including EHR data, as sources of real-world evidence (RWE) for its regulatory decisions involving drug and biological products. Using insights from implementation science, six lessons learned from ACT for developing and sustaining RWD/RWE infrastructures and networks across the CTSA Consortium are presented in order to inform ENACT's development from the outset. Lessons include intentional institutional relationship management, end-user engagement, beta-testing, and customer-driven adaptation. The ENACT team is also conducting customer discovery interviews with CTSA hub and investigators using Innovation-Corps@NCATS (I-Corps™) methodology for biomedical entrepreneurs to uncover unmet RWD needs. Possible ENACT value proposition hypotheses are presented by stage of research. Developing evidence about methods for sustaining academically derived data infrastructures and support can advance the science of translation and support our nation's RWD/RWE research capacity.

Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors and Pregnancy: Analysis of the VigiBase® Spontaneous Reporting System.

In pregnancy, immune checkpoint pathways are involved in the maintenance of fetomaternal immune tolerance. Preclinical studies have shown that immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) increase the risk of fetal death. Despite the fact that using ICIs in pregnant women and women of childbearing potential is not recommended, some case reports of ICI exposure in pregnancy have been published showing favorable fetal outcomes. This study aimed to gain further insight into ICI safety in pregnancy by querying VigiBase®, the World Health Organization's spontaneous reporting system. We performed raw and subgroup disproportionality analyses using the reporting odds ratio and comparing ICIs with the entire database, other antineoplastic agents, and other antineoplastic agents gathered in VigiBase® since 2011. Across 103 safety reports referring to ICI exposure during the peri-pregnancy period, 56 reported pregnancy-related outcomes, of which 46 were without concomitant drugs as potential confounding factors. No signals of disproportionate reporting were found for spontaneous abortion, fetal growth restriction, and prematurity. In light of the expanding indications of ICIs, continuous surveillance by clinicians and pharmacovigilance experts is warranted, along with pharmacoepidemiological studies on other sources of real-world evidence, such as birth records, to precisely assess ICI exposure during the peri-pregnancy period and further characterize relevant outcomes.

Wykorzystanie baz danych Narodowego Funduszu Zdrowia przy ocenie dowodów naukowych z praktyki klinicznej

The use of the National Health Fund databases as a source of real-world evidence Patient medical records and administrative healthcare databases are possible sources of real-world evidence (RWE), i.e., evidence on the potential benefits and risks of a medical product. RWE can complement the evidence from randomized clinical trials. The wide range of information collected by the National Health Fund (NFZ) and the Ministry of Health in Poland ensures the versatility of the data that cover almost all patients treated in Poland. In addition to administrative data (without detailed information about patients and their disease), electronic medical records of some patient groups can be obtained from special programs (e.g., KOS-Zawał) or the System of Monitoring Drug Programs (SMPT). Low usage (only 37 studies) but high usability of NFZ databases as a source of RWE were identified. Joint analysis of data from administrative databases and SMPT can increase the credibility of the study, but limits the study to only patients treated within the Drug Programs.

POSB427 Are Cancer Trials That Describe Themselves As Pragmatic Actually Pragmatic? Insights from a Systematic Review

Pragmatic clinical trials (PCTs) are interventional studies that incorporate design elements which reflect how the investigational therapy would be applied under real-life circumstances. For example, they recruit patients based on relatively few selection criteria, employ flexibility in the delivery of and adherence to the allocated treatment, and avoid subjecting participants to any follow-up procedures that go beyond standard practice. As such, PCTs are considered to be sources of real-world evidence.

Payer perceptions of the use of real-world evidence in oncology-based decision making.

BACKGROUND: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), the gold standard of safety and efficacy evidence, are conducted in select patients that may not mirror real-world populations. As a result, healthcare decision makers may have limited information when making formulary decisions, especially in oncology, given accelerated regulatory approvals and niche patient populations. Real-world evidence (RWE) studies may help address these knowledge gaps and help inform oncology formulary decision making. OBJECTIVE: To assess US payer perceptions regarding the use and relevance of RWE in informing oncology formulary decisionmaking. METHODS: A national survey containing single-answer, multiple-answer, and free-response questions evaluated 4 key areas: (1) the value of RWE, (2) barriers to RWE, (3) sources of RWE, and (4) use of RWE in outcomes-based contracting. The survey was distributed to 221 US payers through the Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy (AMCP) Market Insights program in February 2020. Ten additional respondents were invited to discuss the survey results. The survey results were presented primarily as frequencies of responses and were evaluated by the respondent's plan size, type, and geography (regional vs national). Differences in responses for categorical data were compared using a Pearson Chi-Square or a Fisher's Exact test. Two-tailed values are reported and a level of ≤ 0.05 was used to indicate statistical significance. RESULTS: The national survey had a 45.9% response rate, with 106 payers responding. Most were from managed care organizations (MCOs; 47.5%) and pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs; 37.4%), with 54.5% from large plans (≥ 1 million lives) and 45.5% from small plans (< 1 million lives). Respondents were largely pharmacists (89.9%), with 55.6% overall indicating their job was a pharmacy administrator. Most (84.9%) used RWE to inform formulary decisions in oncology to support comparative effectiveness in the absence of head-to-head clinical trials (4.1 on a scale of 1 = Not At All Useful to 5 = Extremely Useful) and validation of National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) recommendations (4.0). Almost half (41.5%) used RWE results to inform off-label usage decisions. Payers valued RWE pre-launch to inform formulary and contracting decisions and desired real-world comparative effectiveness data post-launch to validate coverage decisions. However, the majority of payers (54.7%) did not conduct their own real-world studies. Commonly considered RWE sources included claims data (79.2%), medical records (68.9%), prospective cohort studies (60.4%), patient registries (36.8%), and patient outcome surveys (33.0%). Barriers to conducting internal RWE studies included the lack of resources and personnel, analytic capabilities, appropriate in-house data, and perceived value in conducting analyses. Payers expressed interest in using outcomes-based contracting in oncology; few have direct experience, and operationalizing through value measurement is challenging. CONCLUSIONS: RWE providing comparative treatment data, validation of NCCN treatment recommendations, and information on off-label usage are appreciated pre launch with post launch validation. DISCLOSURES: Pfizer provided funding for this research, and employees of Pfizer led the development of the survey and contributed to the manuscript as authors. Arondekar and Niyazov are employees of Pfizer; Oderda, Biskupiak, and Brixner are managers of Millcreek Outcomes Group and were paid as consultants on this project. Burgoyne was a consultant for Pfizer on this project. Malone was paid by Millcreek Outcomes as a consultant on this project.

Connected health for growth hormone treatment research and clinical practice: learnings from different sources of real-world evidence (RWE)\u2014large electronically collected datasets, surveillance studies and individual patients\u2019 cases

BackgroundA range of factors can reduce the effectiveness of treatment prescribed for the long-term management of chronic health conditions, such as growth disorders. In particular, prescription medications may not achieve the positive outcomes expected because approximately half of patients adhere poorly to the prescribed treatment regimen.MethodsAdherence to treatment has previously been assessed using relatively unreliable subjective methods, such as patient self-reporting during clinical follow-up, or counting prescriptions filled or vials returned by patients. Here, we report on a new approach, the use of electronically recorded objective evidence of date, time, and dose taken which was obtained through a comprehensive eHealth ecosystem, based around the easypod™ electromechanical auto-injection device and web-based connect software. The benefits of this eHealth approach are also illustrated here by two case studies, selected from the Finnish cohort of the easypod™ Connect Observational Study (ECOS), a 5-year, open-label, observational study that enrolled children from 24 countries who were being treated with growth hormone (GH) via the auto-injection device.ResultsAnalyses of data from 9314 records from the easypod™ connect database showed that, at each time point studied, a significantly greater proportion of female patients had high adherence (≥ 85%) than male patients (2849/3867 [74%] vs 3879/5447 [71%]; P < 0.001). Furthermore, more of the younger patients (< 10 years for girls, < 12 years for boys) were in the high adherence range (P < 0.001). However, recursive partitioning of data from ECOS identified subgroups with lower adherence to GH treatment ‒ children who performed the majority of injections themselves at an early age (~ 8 years) and teenagers starting treatment aged ≥ 14 years.ConclusionsThe data and case studies presented herein illustrate the importance of adherence to GH therapy and how good growth outcomes can be achieved by following treatment as described. They also show how the device, software, and database ecosystem can complement normal clinical follow-up by providing HCPs with reliable information about patient adherence between visits and also providing researchers with real-world evidence of adherence and growth outcomes across a large population of patients with growth disorders treated with GH via the easypod™ device.

Real-world evidence use in assessments of cancer drugs by NICE.

To establish how real-world evidence (RWE) has been used to inform single technology appraisals (STAs) of cancer drugs conducted by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). STAs published by NICE from April 2011 to October 2018 that evaluated cancer treatments were reviewed. Information regarding the use of RWE to directly inform the company-submitted cost-effectiveness analysis was extracted and categorized by topic. Summary statistics were used to describe emergent themes, and a narrative summary was provided for key case studies. Materials for a total of 113 relevant STAs were identified and analyzed, of which nearly all (96 percent) included some form of RWE within the company-submitted cost-effectiveness analysis. The most common categories of RWE use concerned the health-related quality of life of patients (71 percent), costs (46 percent), and medical resource utilization (40 percent). While sources of RWE were routinely criticized as part of the appraisal process, we identified only two cases where the use of RWE was overtly rejected; hence, in the majority of cases, RWE was accepted in cancer drug submissions to NICE. RWE has been used extensively in cancer submissions to NICE. Key criticisms of RWE in submissions to NICE are seldom regarding the use of RWE in general; instead, these are typically concerned with specific data sources and the applicability of these to the decision problem. Within an appropriate context, RWE constitutes an extremely valuable source of information to inform decision making; yet the development of best practice guidelines may improve current reporting standards.

[The Role of Patient Registry in the Care and Therapeutic Development for Patients with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis: JaCALS].

Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) patient registries can assist in the provision of appropriate care to patients and promote therapeutic developments related to ALS. In Japan, a multicenter registration and follow-up system called the Japanese Consortium for Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis research (JaCALS) was built in 2006. Genomic DNA samples and B-cell lines of patients with ALS were stored and linked to clinical information. Information obtained from JaCALS shows the natural histories of Japanese patients with ALS, including their genetic backgrounds and clinical and genetic factors associated with disease progression and prognosis. Research efforts that focus on pathophysiology, identification of biomarkers related to progression and prognosis, and drug discoveries for patients with ALS are advanced using data obtained from JaCALS. In the future, we expect that JaCALS will be a source of real-world evidence, combining data from a large number of cases.

Relevance theory and citations

Relevance theory (RT) holds that the relevance of communications is determined by their cognitive effects and the effort needed to process them. The evidence is usually drawn from dialogues between speakers and hearers. Self-communing scholars and scientists afford a new source of real-world evidence as they cite various works over time. Authors cite works with the intention of strengthening their claims in context – a cognitive effect for them as well as for readers – and the works they choose to cite most frequently are found through least-effort behavior. Indicators of least effort include heavy reliance on self-citation, re-citation of a limited number of acquaintances and orienting figures known through reading, and the use of closely related vocabulary across texts. Such practices produce the power-law distributions of citations and terms that are ubiquitous in bibliometrics. These distributions accord well with the claimed universality of RT's Cognitive Principle on maximization of relevance. Authors maximize the relevance of citations for themselves, then optimize those citations for readers under the Communicative Principle. Examples are drawn from a set of course readings, the citation records of three authors, and word-association data. Major tenets of RT have considerable power in explaining various findings from citation research.