Advancing structured decision‐making in drug regulation at the FDA and EMA. Issue 2 (1st July 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Angelis, Aris; Phillips, Lawrence D.
• Is Part Of: British journal of clinical pharmacology. Volume 87:Issue 2(2021)
• Page Start: 395
• Page End: 405
• Publication Date: 2020-07-01
• Subjects: benefit–risk assessment -- decision analysis -- drug regulation -- EMA -- FDA -- MCDA; Pharmacology -- Periodicals; Drugs -- Periodicals; 615.1
• DOI: 10.1111/bcp.14425
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0306-5251

Abstract

Abstract : The recent benefit–risk framework (BRF) developed by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is intended to improve the clarity and consistency in communicating the reasoning behind the FDA's decisions, acting as an important advancement in US drug regulation. In the PDUFA VI implementation plan, the FDA states that it will continue to explore more structured or quantitative decision analysis approaches; however, it restricts their use within the current BRF that is purely qualitative. By contrast, European regulators and researchers have been long exploring the use of quantitative decision analysis approaches for evaluating drug benefit–risk balance. In this paper, we show how quantitative modelling, backed by decision theory, could complement and extend the FDA's BRF to better support the appraisal of evidence and improve decision outcomes. After providing relevant scientific definitions for benefit–risk assessment and describing the FDA and European Medicines Agency (EMA) frameworks, we explain the components of and differences between qualitative and quantitative approaches. We present lessons learned from the EMA experience with the use of quantitative modelling and we provide evidence of its benefits, illustrated by a real case study that helped to resolve differences of judgements among EMA regulators.