Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Real-World Evidence Utilization in Clinical Development Reflected by US Product Labeling: Statistical Review

  • Review
  • Published:
Therapeutic Innovation & Regulatory Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has shown scientific discretion in interpreting the substantial evidence requirement for the approval of new drugs with its considerations on the use of single controlled or uncontrolled trials (Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act § 505(d), 21 USC 355(d), 1962). With the passage of the 21st Centuries Cures Act (21st Century Cures-patients. House, Energy and Commerce Committee, Washington, DC, 2019 available at: https://energycommerce.house.gov/sites/republicans.energycommerce.house.gov/files/analysis/21stCenturyCures/20140516PatientsWhitePaper.pdf), the FDA is mandated to expand the role of real-world evidence (RWE) in support of drug approval. This mandate further broadens the scope of scientific discretion to include data collected outside clinical trials. We summarize the agency’s past acceptance of real-world data (RWD) sources for supporting drug approval in new indications which have been reflected in US labels. In our summary, we focus on the type of RWD and statistical methodologies presented in these labels. Furthermore, two labels were selected for in-depth assessment of the RWE presented in these labels. Through these examples, we demonstrate the issues that can be raised in data collection that could affect interpretation. In addition, a brief discussion of statistical methods that can be used to incorporate RWE to clinical development is presented.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act § 505(d), 21 USC 355(d); 1962.

  2. 21st Century Cures-patients. Washington, DC: House, Energy and Commerce Committee. Available at: https://energycommerce.house.gov/sites/republicans.energycommerce.house.gov/files/analysis/21stCenturyCures/20140516PatientsWhitePaper.pdf. Subscription Required. Accessed 9 Dec 2019.

  3. US Food and Drug Administration Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (FDA CDER). Guidance for Industry: Providing Clinical Evidence of Effectiveness for Human Drug and Biological Products. Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Rockville; 1998. https://www.fda.gov/media/71655/download.

  4. Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act of 1997 §115, 21 USC 355; 2014.

  5. Silverman B. A Baker’s dozen of US FDA efficacy approvals using real world evidence. pink sheet. Published August 07, 2018. Available at: https://pink.pharmaintelligence.informa.com/PS123648/A-Bakers-Dozen-Of-US-FDA-Efficacy-Approvals-Using-Real-World-Evidence. Subscription required. Accessed 9 Dec 2019.

  6. US Food and Drug Administration Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER) Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER). Draft Guidance: Demonstrating Substantial Evidence of Effectiveness for Human Drug and Biological Products Guidance for Industry. Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Rockville; 2019. https://www.fda.gov/media/133660/download.

  7. US Food and Drug Administration Center for Devices and Radiological Health. Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff. Use of real-world evidence to support regulatory decision-making for medical devices. Centre for Devices and Radiological Health, Rockville; 2017. https://www.fda.gov/media/99447/download.

  8. US Food and Drug Administration. Framework for FDA’s Real-World Evidence Program. MD: Rockville; December 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Duke Margolis Center for Health Policy. Public Workshop: A Framework for Regulatory Use of Real-World Evidence. Washington, DC: September 2017.

  10. Sasinowski FJ. Quantum of effectiveness evidence in FDA’s approval of orphan drugs. Drug Information Journal. 2012; 46: 238–263. Available at: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0092861511435906. Accessed December 12, 2019.

  11. Sasinowski FJ, Panico EB, Valentine JE. Quantum of effectiveness evidence in FDA’s approval of orphan drugs: update, July 2010 to June 2014. Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2015;49:680–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Hatswell AJ, Baio G, Berlin JA, Irs A, Freemantle N. Regulatory approval of pharmaceuticals without a randomised controlled study: analysis of EMA and FDA approvals 1999–2014. BMJ Open. 2016;6:e011666.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Razavi M, Glasziou P, Klocksieben FA, Ioannidis JP, Chalmers I, Djulbegovic B. US Food and Drug Administration approvals of drugs and devices based on nonrandomized clinical trials: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Netw Open. 2019;2(9):e1911111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Belson NA. FDA’S Historical Use of “Real World Evidence”. FDLI (Food and Drug Law Institute). Available at: https://www.fdli.org/2018/08/update-fdas-historical-use-of-real-world-evidence/. Accessed 9 Dec 2019.

  15. Woolacott N, Corbett M, Jones-Diette J, Hodgson R. Methodological challenges for the evaluation of clinical effectiveness in the context of accelerated regulatory approval: an overview. J Clin Epidemiol. 2017;90:108–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. DuMouchel W. Bayesian data mining in large frequency tables, with an application to the FDA spontaneous reporting system. Am Stat. 1999;53(3):177–90.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Ruffieux Y. Combining RCT efficacy data and real-world evidence to predict drug effectiveness: a case study in Rheumatoid Arthritis. PSI Workshop; September 18, 2018; Bad Homburg, Germany. Available at: https://www.psiweb.org/docs/default-source/default-document-library/yann-ruffieux.pdf?sfvrsn=2882d9db_0. Accessed 28 Nov 2019.

  18. Gedeborg R, Cline C, Zethelius B, Salmonson T. Pragmatic clinical trials in the context of regulation of medicines. Uppsala J Med Sci. 2019;124:37–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Zuidgeest MGP, Goetz I, Groenwold RHH, Irving E, van Thiel GJMW, Grobbee DE. Series: Pragmatic trials and real world evidence: Paper 1: Introduction. J Clin Epidemiol. 2017;88:7–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Mulberg AE, Bucci-Rechtweg C, Giuliano J, et al. Regulatory strategies for rare diseases under current global regulatory statutes: a discussion with stakeholders. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2019;14(1):36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Rosenbaum PR, Rubin DB. The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika. 1983;70:41–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Freemantle N, Marston L, Walters K, Wood J, Reynolds MR, Petersen I. Making inferences on treatment effects from real world data: propensity scores, confounding by indication, and other perils for the unwary in observational research. BMJ. 2013;347:f6409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Tuglus C, Tran Q, Holland C. Real world data for oncology drug development: promise and pitfalls. JSM 2019. Available at: https://ww2.amstat.org/meetings/jsm/2019/onlineprogram/AbstractDetails.cfm?abstractid=304891. Accessed 28 Nov 2019.

  24. Lin J, Gamalo-Siebers M, Tiwari R. Propensity score matched augmented controls in randomized clinical trials: a case study. Pharm Stat. 2018;17:629–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Lim J, Walley R, Yuan J, et al. Minimizing patient burden through the use of historical subject-level data in innovative confirmatory clinical trials: review of methods and opportunities. Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2018;52(5):546–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Pennello G, Thompson L. Experience with reviewing Bayesian medical device trials. J Biopharm Stat. 2007;18(1):81–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Han B, Zhan J, John Zhong Z, Liu D, Lindborg S. Covariate-adjusted borrowing of historical control data in randomized clinical trials. Pharm Stat. 2017;16(4):296–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Lin J, Gamalo-Siebers M, Tiwari R. Propensity-score-based priors for Bayesian augmented control design. Pharm Stat. 2019;18:223–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Belger M. Cross-design approaches combining observational and clinical trial data for HTA. PSI workshop conference 2018. Available at: https://www.psiweb.org/docs/default-source/default-document-library/mark-belger.pdf?sfvrsn=cc83d9db_0. Accessed 28 Nov 2019.

  30. Böhme S. Indirect comparisons w/o adjustment for patient characteristics within the framework of AMNOG. PSI Workshop; September 18, 2018; Bad Homburg, Germany. Available at: https://www.psiweb.org/docs/default-source/default-document-library/sarah-bohme.pdf?sfvrsn=1482d9db_0. Accessed 28 Nov 2019.

  31. Abrams KR. Combining Observational & Clinical Trial Evidence for Health Technology Assessment (HTA). PSI workshop 2018. Available at: https://www.psiweb.org/docs/default-source/default-document-library/keith-r-abrams.pdf?sfvrsn=d283d9db_0. Accessed 28 Nov 2019.

  32. US Food and Drug Administration. FDALabel: Full-Text Search of Drug Labeling. Version 2.4. Available at: https://nctr-crs.fda.gov/fdalabel/ui/search. Accessed 11 Feb 2020.

  33. US Food and Drug Administration. Drugs@ FDA: FDA approved drug products. Available at: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cder/daf/. Accessed 11 Feb 2020.

  34. US Food and Drug Administration. Search Orphan Drug Designations and Approvals. Available at: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/opdlisting/oopd/. Accessed 16 Dec 2019.

  35. FDA approves first treatment for rare disease in patients who receive stem cell transplant from blood or bone marrow. FDA website. https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-approves-first-treatment-rare-disease-patients-who-receive-stem-cell-transplant-blood-or-bone. Published March 30, 2016. Accessed 28 Nov 2019.

  36. Prescribing Information (Labeling): DEFITELIO (defibrotide sodium) injection, for intravenous use Initial U.S. Approval. 2016. Available at: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2016/208114lbl.pdf. Accessed 9 Dec 2019.

  37. Food and Drug Administration Centre for Drug Evaluation and Research (FDA CDER). Application Number: 208114Orig1s000 Medical Review(s). https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/nda/2016/208114Orig1s000MedR.pdf. Accessed 28 Nov 2019.

  38. Food and Drug Administration Centre for Drug Evaluation and Research (FDA CDER). Application Number: 208114Orig1s000 Statistical Review(s). https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/nda/2016/208114Orig1s000StatR.pdf. Accessed 6 Jan 2020.

  39. Hayes E, Sutter S. BioMarin’s Brineura Approval Shows FDA’s Open Door For Orphan Drugs. Pink Sheet. Published May 02, 2017. Available at: https://pink.pharmaintelligence.informa.com/PS120539/BioMarins-Brineura-Approval-Shows-FDAs-Open-Door-For-Orphan-Drugs. Subscription required. Accessed 5 Dec 2019.

  40. Schulz A. DEM-CHILD—a treatment-oriented research project of NCL disorders as a major cause of dementia in childhood. Neuropediatrics. 2013. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0033-1337848.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Center For Drug Evaluation And Research. Application Number: 761052Orig1s000 Statistical Review(s). https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/nda/2017/761052Orig1s000StatR.pdf. Accessed from https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cder/daf/index.cfm?event=overview.process&ApplNo=761052. Accessed 5 Dec 2019.

  42. Schulz A, Ajayi T, Specchio N, et al. Study of intraventricular cerliponase alfa for CLN2 disease. New Engl J Med. 2018;378:1898–907.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. McCaughan M. Pfizer’s ibrance and the realities of 'real-world' evidence. Published August 17, 2019. Available at: https://pink.pharmaintelligence.informa.com/PS140670/Pfizers-Ibrance-And-The-Realities-Of-RealWorld-Evidence. Subscription required. Accessed 11 Feb 2020.

  44. Prescribing Information (Labeling): IBRANCE (palbociclib) capsules, for oral use. Initial U.S. Approval: 2015. Available at: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2019/207103Orig1s012lbl.pdf. Accessed 20 Feb 2020.

Download references

Funding

No funding sources.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA

    Yodit Seifu PhD

  2. Global Statistical Sciences, Eli Lilly & Co, Lilly Corporate Center, Indianapolis, IN, USA

    Margaret Gamalo-Siebers PhD

  3. PRA Health Sciences, Mannheim, Germany

    Friederike M.-S. Barthel PhD

  4. Takeda Pharmaceutical Co. Limited, Cambridge, MA, USA

    Junjing Lin PhD

  5. Division of Biometrics I, Office of Biostatistics, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, US Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD, USA

    Junshan Qiu PhD

  6. Amgen Inc., One Amgen Center Dr., Thousand Oaks, CA, USA

    Freda Cooner PhD

  7. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, East Hanover, NJ, USA

    Shiling Ruan PhD

  8. UCB Pharma, Slough, Berks, UK

    Rosalind Walley MA

Authors
  1. Yodit Seifu PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Margaret Gamalo-Siebers PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Friederike M.-S. Barthel PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Junjing Lin PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Junshan Qiu PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Freda Cooner PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Shiling Ruan PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Rosalind Walley MA
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yodit Seifu PhD.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Disclaimer This paper reflects the views of the authors and should not be construed to represent FDA’s views or policies.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 27 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Seifu, Y., Gamalo-Siebers, M., Barthel, F.MS. et al. Real-World Evidence Utilization in Clinical Development Reflected by US Product Labeling: Statistical Review. Ther Innov Regul Sci 54, 1436–1443 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43441-020-00170-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s43441-020-00170-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation