首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Frontiers in Medicine >Alignment of European Regulatory and Health Technology Assessments: A Review of Licensed Products for Alzheimers Disease
【2h】

Alignment of European Regulatory and Health Technology Assessments: A Review of Licensed Products for Alzheimers Disease

机译:欧洲法规和卫生技术评估的一致性:阿尔茨海默氏病许可产品的审查

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

>Aims: To facilitate regulatory learning, we evaluated similarities and differences in evidence requirements between regulatory and health technology assessment (HTA) bodies of Alzheimer's disease (AD) approved products.>Methods: The European marketing authorisation application dossiers and European public assessment reports (EPARs) of the licensed AD drugs were screened to identify the phase III randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and outcomes used. We also screened the assessment reports of the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE, England) and the National Health Care Institute (ZiN, the Netherlands) to identify the studies and outcomes used in HTA assessments.>Results: The application dossiers of donepezil, galantamine, rivastigmine, and memantine contained 16 phase III RCTs in total. These trials were also included in HTA assessments except that NICE excluded studies that were not published (n = 2) or trials that included patients with other types of dementia (n = 3). In the regulatory assessments the focus was on cognitive and global outcomes, and to some extent on function. In the HTA assessments of clinical effectiveness other domains were also covered including: function, behaviour and mood, and, occasionally, quality of life. In the economic analyses of NICE the domains cognition, function, and quality of life were included.>Conclusion: There was a large overlap in inclusion of trials in regulatory and HTA assessments, although the focus on specific outcomes slightly differed. Understanding the methods and perceptions of both authorities can stimulate regulatory and HTA cross-talk and further alignment, and therefore more rapid patient access to new treatments.
机译:>目标::为促进法规学习,我们评估了阿尔茨海默氏病(AD)批准产品的法规和卫生技术评估(HTA)机构之间证据要求的异同。>方法:筛选了获许可的AD药物的欧洲营销授权申请卷宗和欧洲公共评估报告(EPAR),以识别III期随机对照试验(RCT)和使用的结果。我们还筛选了美国国家健康与护理卓越研究所(NICE)和国家健康护理研究所(荷兰ZiN)的评估报告,以识别用于HTA评估的研究和结果。>结果:多奈哌齐,加兰他敏,卡巴拉汀和美金刚的申请资料共包含16个III期RCT。这些试验也包括在HTA评估中,但NICE排除了未发表的研究(n = 2)或包括其他类型痴呆患者的试验(n = 3)。在监管评估中,重点放在认知和整体结果上,并在一定程度上注重功能。在HTA的临床疗效评估中,还涵盖了其他领域,包括:功能,行为和情绪,以及偶尔的生活质量。在NICE的经济分析中,包括了领域的认知,功能和生活质量。>结论:尽管在试验中将监管纳入HTA和HTA评估之间存在很大的重叠,但对特定结局的关注略微不同。理解两个主管部门的方法和看法可以促进监管和HTA的相互影响以及进一步的配合,从而使患者更快地获得新的治疗方法。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号