Comparison of treatment effect sizes from pivotal and postapproval trials of novel therapeutics approved by the FDA based on surrogate markers of disease: a meta-epidemiological study
نویسندگان
چکیده
BACKGROUND The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) often approves new drugs based on trials that use surrogate markers for endpoints, which involve certain trade-offs and may risk making erroneous inferences about the medical product's actual clinical effect. This study aims to compare the treatment effects among pivotal trials supporting FDA approval of novel therapeutics based on surrogate markers of disease with those observed among postapproval trials for the same indication. METHODS We searched Drugs@FDA and PubMed to identify published randomized superiority design pivotal trials for all novel drugs initially approved by the FDA between 2005 and 2012 based on surrogate markers as primary endpoints and published postapproval trials using the same surrogate markers or patient-relevant outcomes as endpoints. Summary ratio of odds ratios (RORs) and difference between standardized mean differences (dSMDs) were used to quantify the average difference in treatment effects between pivotal and matched postapproval trials. RESULTS Between 2005 and 2012, the FDA approved 88 novel drugs for 90 indications based on one or multiple pivotal trials using surrogate markers of disease. Of these, 27 novel drugs for 27 indications were approved based on pivotal trials using surrogate markers as primary endpoints that could be matched to at least one postapproval trial, for a total of 43 matches. For nine (75.0%) of the 12 matches using the same non-continuous surrogate markers as trial endpoints, pivotal trials had larger treatment effects than postapproval trials. On average, treatment effects were 50% higher (more beneficial) in the pivotal than the postapproval trials (ROR 1.5; 95% confidence interval CI 1.01-2.23). For 17 (54.8%) of the 31 matches using the same continuous surrogate markers as trial endpoints, pivotal trials had larger treatment effects than the postapproval trials. On average, there was no difference in treatment effects between pivotal and postapproval trials (dSMDs 0.01; 95% CI -0.15-0.16). CONCLUSIONS Many postapproval drug trials are not directly comparable to previously published pivotal trials, particularly with respect to endpoint selection. Although treatment effects from pivotal trials supporting FDA approval of novel therapeutics based on non-continuous surrogate markers of disease are often larger than those observed among postapproval trials using surrogate markers as trial endpoints, there is no evidence of difference between pivotal and postapproval trials using continuous surrogate markers.
منابع مشابه
Postapproval studies of drugs initially approved by the FDA on the basis of limited evidence: systematic review
Objective To characterize the prospective controlled clinical studies for all novel drugs that were initially approved by the Food and Drug Administration on the basis of limited evidence.Design Systematic review.Data sources Drugs@FDA database and PubMed.Study inclusion All prospective controlled clinical studies published after approval for all novel drugs initially approved by the FDA betwee...
متن کاملPivotal clinical trials of novel ophthalmic drugs and medical devices: retrospective observational study, 2002–2012
OBJECTIVES Novel therapeutics are an important part of ophthalmologists' armamentarium, and the risks and benefits of these therapies must be carefully evaluated. We sought to quantify the characteristics of the pivotal clinical trials supporting the regulatory approval of new ophthalmic drugs and medical devices. DESIGN Retrospective observational study. SETTING AND DATA SOURCE Medical rev...
متن کاملPublication of Clinical Trials Supporting Successful New Drug Applications: A Literature Analysis
BACKGROUND The United States (US) Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approves new drugs based on sponsor-submitted clinical trials. The publication status of these trials in the medical literature and factors associated with publication have not been evaluated. We sought to determine the proportion of trials submitted to the FDA in support of newly approved drugs that are published in biomedica...
متن کاملThe effect of quercetin on stress The Effect of Quercetin on Stress Oxidative Markers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Clinical Trialsers; A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled clinical trials
Background: Quercetin is one of the main flavonoids, overall distributed in plants. The antioxidant capacity of quercetin is several times vitamin E and glutathione. This systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials were performed to determine the effect of quercetin on oxidative stress (OS) markers. Methods: A literature search was conducted in PubMed, ISI Web of Science...
متن کاملClinical trial evidence supporting FDA approval of novel therapeutic agents, 2005-2012.
IMPORTANCE Many patients and physicians assume that the safety and effectiveness of newly approved therapeutic agents is well understood; however, the strength of the clinical trial evidence supporting approval decisions by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has not been evaluated. OBJECTIVES To characterize pivotal efficacy trials (clinical trials that serve as the basis of FDA approv...
متن کامل