How do the EMA and FDA decide which anticancer drugs make it to the market? A comparative qualitative study on decision makers' views

被引:32
|
作者
Tafuri, G. [1 ,2 ]
Stolk, P. [2 ]
Trotta, F. [1 ]
Putzeist, M. [2 ]
Leufkens, H. G. [2 ,3 ]
Laing, R. O. [4 ]
De Allegri, M. [5 ]
机构
[1] Italian Med Agcy AIFA, I-00187 Rome, Italy
[2] Univ Utrecht, Utrecht Inst Pharmaceut Sci, Utrecht, Netherlands
[3] Med Evaluat Board, Utrecht, Netherlands
[4] World Hlth Org, Geneva, Switzerland
[5] Heidelberg Univ, Inst Publ Hlth, Heidelberg, Germany
关键词
regulatory; EMA; FDA; interview study; qualitative research; anticancer medicines;
D O I
10.1093/annonc/mdt512
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Background: The process leading to a regulatory outcome is guided by factors both related and unrelated to the data package, defined in this analysis as 'formal and informal factors', respectively. The aim of this qualitative study was to analyse which formal and informal factors drive the decision-making process of the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulators with regard to anticancer drugs, using in-depth semi-structured interviews with regulators of the two agencies. Methods: In line with the theory and practice of qualitative research, no set sample size was defined a priori. Respondent enrolment continued until saturation and redundancy were reached. Data were collected through means of in-depth semi-structured interviews conducted either in a face-to-face setting or via Skype (R) with each regulator. The interviews were audio-recorded and verbatim transcribed. The analysis was manually carried out on the transcribed text. Data were independently coded and categorized by two researchers. Interpretation of the findings emerged through a process of triangulation between the two. Results: Seven EMA and six FDA regulators, who had extensive experience with making decisions about anticancer medicines, were interviewed between April and June 2012. There is an open dialogue between the FDA and EMA, with the two moving closer and exchanging information, not opinions. Differences in decision-making between the agencies may be due to a different evaluation of end points. Different interaction modalities with industry and patients represent an additional source of divergence with a potential impact on decision-making. The key message of our respondents was that the agencies manage uncertainty in a different way: unlike the EMA, the FDA has a prevailing attitude to take risks in order to guarantee quicker access to new treatments. Conclusions: Although formal factors are the main drivers for regulatory decisions, the influence of informal factors plays an important role in the drug evaluation process.
引用
收藏
页码:265 / 269
页数:5
相关论文
共 5 条
  • [1] How do examiners decide?: a qualitative study of the process of decision making in the oral examination component of the MRCGP examination
    Yaphe, J
    Street, S
    MEDICAL EDUCATION, 2003, 37 (09) : 764 - 771
  • [2] Decision support for chronic pain care: how do primary care physicians decide when to prescribe opioids? a qualitative study
    Harle, Christopher A.
    Bauer, Sarah E.
    Hoang, Huong Q.
    Cook, Robert L.
    Hurley, Robert W.
    Fillingim, Roger B.
    BMC FAMILY PRACTICE, 2015, 16
  • [3] Decision support for chronic pain care: how do primary care physicians decide when to prescribe opioids? a qualitative study
    Christopher A Harle
    Sarah E Bauer
    Huong Q Hoang
    Robert L Cook
    Robert W Hurley
    Roger B Fillingim
    BMC Family Practice, 16
  • [4] How do decision-makers use evidence in community health policy and financing decisions? A qualitative study and conceptual framework in four African countries
    Kumar, Meghan Bruce
    Taegtmeyer, Miriam
    Madan, Jason
    Ndima, Sozinho
    Chikaphupha, Kingsley
    Kea, Aschenaki
    Barasa, Edwine
    HEALTH POLICY AND PLANNING, 2020, 35 (07) : 799 - 809
  • [5] How do people who use drugs experience treatment? A qualitative analysis of views about opioid substitution treatment in primary care (iCARE study)
    Gomes Alves, Paula Cristina
    Stevenson, Fiona A.
    Mylan, Sophie
    Pires, Nuno
    Winstock, Adam
    Ford, Chris
    BMJ OPEN, 2021, 11 (02):