The Use of External Controls in FDA Regulatory Decision Making
Tóm tắt
The regulatory standards of the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) require substantial evidence of effectiveness from adequate and well-controlled trials that typically use a valid comparison to an internal concurrent control. However, when it is not feasible or ethical to use an internal control, particularly in rare disease populations, relying on external controls may be acceptable. To better understand the use of external controls to support product development and approval, we reviewed FDA regulatory approval decisions between 2000 and 2019 for drug and biologic products to identify pivotal studies that leveraged external controls, with a focus on select therapeutic areas. Forty-five approvals were identified where FDA accepted external control data in their benefit/risk assessment; they did so for many reasons including the rare nature of the disease, ethical concerns regarding use of a placebo or no-treatment arm, the seriousness of the condition, and the high unmet medical need. Retrospective natural history data, including retrospective reviews of patient records, was the most common source of external control (44%). Other types of external control were baseline control (33%); published data (11%); and data from a previous clinical study (11%). To gain further insights, a comprehensive evaluation of selected approvals utilizing different types of external control is provided to highlight the variety of approaches used by sponsors and the challenges encountered in supporting product development and FDA decision making; particularly, the value and use of retrospective natural history in the development of products for rare diseases. Education on the use of external controls based on FDA regulatory precedent will allow for continued use and broader application of innovative approaches to clinical trial design, while avoiding delays in product development for rare diseases. Learnings from this review also highlight the need to update regulatory guidance to acknowledge the utility of external controls, particularly retrospective natural history data.
Từ khóa
Tài liệu tham khảo
International Conference on Harmonization (ICH) E10: Choice of control group and related issues in clinical trials. https://database.ich.org/sites/default/files/E10_Guideline.pdf. July 2000 [Also published as an FDA final draft guidance dated May 2001].
FDA Guidance For Industry: Demonstrating substantial evidence of effectiveness for human drug and biological products. https://www.fda.gov/media/133660/download. December 2019.
FDA Guidance For Industry: Rare diseases–natural history studies for drug development. https://www.fda.gov/media/122425/download. March 2019.
FDA Guidance For Industry: Rare diseases—common issues in drug development. https://www.fda.gov/media/120091/download. February 2019 (Revision 1).
Framework for FDA’s real-world evidence program. https://www.fda.gov/media/120060/download. December 2018.
Mack C, Christian J, Brinkley E, Warren EJ, Hall M, Dreyer N (2020) When context is hard to come by: external comparators and how to use them. Ther Innov Regul Sci. 1–7
Statement from FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb, MD, on FDA’s new strategic framework to advance use of real-world evidence to support development of drugs and biologics. https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/statement-fda-commissioner-scott-gottlieb-md-fdas-new-strategic-framework-advance-use-real-world. December 2018.
FDA Guidance For Industry: Human gene therapy in rare diseases. https://www.fda.gov/media/113807/download. January 2020.
FDA Guidance For Industry: Expedited programs for serious conditions. https://www.fda.gov/files/drugs/published/Expedited-Programs-for-Serious-Conditions-Drugs-and-Biologics.pdf. May 2014.
FDA Guidance For Industry: Expedited programs for regenerative medicine therapies for serious conditions. https://www.fda.gov/media/120267/download. February 2019.
FDA Guidance For Industry: Duchenne muscular dystrophy and related dystrophinopathies: developing drugs for treatment. https://www.fda.gov/media/92233/download. February 2018.
FDA Guidance For Industry: Use of Bayesian statistics in medical device clinical trials. https://www.fda.gov/media/71512/download. February 2010.
FDA Guidance For Industry: Adaptive designs for clinical trials of drugs and biologics. https://www.fda.gov/media/78495/download. November 2019.
FDA Guidance For Industry: Interacting with the FDA on complex innovative trial designs for drugs and biological products. https://www.fda.gov/media/130897/download. September 2019.
Hatzwell AJ, Baio G, Berlin JA, et al. Regulatory approval of pharmaceuticals without a randomized controlled study: analysis of EMA and FDA approvals 1999–2014. BMJ Open. 2016;6:
Goring S, Taylor A, Muller K, et al. Characteristics of non-randomised studies using comparisons with external controls submitted for regulatory approval in the USA and Europe: a systematic review. BMJ Open. 2019;9:e024895
Sasinowski FJ. Quantum of effectiveness evidence in FDA’s approval of orphan drugs, cataloging FDA’s flexibility in regulating therapies for persons with rare disorders. Drug Inf J. 2012;46(2):238–63.
French JA, Wang S, Warnock B, et al. Historical controls monotherapy design in the treatment of epilepsy. Epilepsia. 2010;51(10):1936–43.
Pocock SJ. The combination of randomized and historical controls in clinical trials. J Chron Dis. 1976;29:175–88.
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.
Gehan EA, Freireich EJ. Non-randomized controls in cancer clinical trials. N Engl J Med. 1974;290(4):198–203.
Fleming TR, Ellenberg SS. Evaluating interventions for Ebola: the need for randomized trials. Clin Trials. 2016;13(1):6–9.
Elze MC, Gregson J, Baber U, et al. Comparison of propensity score methods and covariate adjustment: evaluation in 4 cardiovascular studies. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;69(3):345–57.
Rosenbaum PR, Rubin DB. The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika. 1983;70:41–55.
National Research Council. The prevention and treatment of missing data in clinical trials. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2010.
FDA Rare Disease Day 2020: supporting the future of rare disease. https://www.fda.gov/media/136455/download. February 2020.