Benefit Risk Assessment. Patrick Salmon Eurordis Summer School 8 th June, 2016

Similar documents
Indications and labelling; general aspects. EMA-Payer Community meeting Sept 19th, 2017 Kristina Dunder, CHMP member

Stated Preference Methods Research in Health Care Decision Making A Critical Review of Its Use in the European Regulatory Environment.

Consistency in REC Review

The relative importance or values of the main outcomes of interest: Outcome. Survival to Hospital Discharge

Mapping the Informed Health Choices (IHC) Key Concepts (KC) to core concepts for the main steps of Evidence-Based Health Care (EBHC).

Concept paper on the guidance on the non-clinical and clinical development of medicinal products for HIV prevention including oral and topical PrEP

Observational Studies and PCOR: What are the right questions?

Industry Perspective. Eliquis (apixaban) EMA Workshop: The role of PK and PD measurements in the use of DOACs 23 November 2015

Access to newly licensed medicines. Scottish Medicines Consortium

An HTA Perspective. Cynthia P Iglesias Urrutia MSc PhD

Summary of product characteristics (SmPC)

E11(R1) Addendum to E11: Clinical Investigation of Medicinal Products in the Pediatric Population Step4

VLBW infants have complications related to prematurity, particularly ICH, hypotension and anemia/need for transfusion

Assessing benefit/risk of medicinal products

Drug Information Association (DIA) 23 rd Annual EuroMeeting

Process - Where are we Now? Lessons Learned and Identifying Blocks. Regulatory view Jan Müller-Berghaus

Overview of methodologies and studies evaluating risk minimisation measures

Multicriteria Decision Analysis of Drug Harms in the UK and Europe

PGEU GPUE. Pharmaceutical Group of European Union Groupement Pharmaceutique de l Union Européenne

Andrea Beyer, MPH University of Groningen

Less is more: Guidelines

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK. Noor Hazlina Ahmad, PhD School of Management 6 th January th PhD Colloquium School of Management

Regulatory requirements for universal flu vaccines Perspective from the EU regulators

Health care guidelines, recommendations, care pathways

Quantitative benefit-risk assessment: An analytical framework for a shared understanding of the effects of medicines. Patrick Ryan 21 April 2010

BACKGROUND + GENERAL COMMENTS

ME/CFS : stakeholder engagement meeting. Issues for people with severe ME/CFS

Latent tuberculosis infection

THE INTEGRITY PROFILING SYSTEM

Meta-analysis of safety thoughts from CIOMS X

Information provided to Duchenne muscular dystrophy patient organisations regarding Raxone

Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire (EIQ16)

Access to clinical trial information and the stockpiling of Tamiflu. Department of Health

Outcome Report on Pilot to involve patients in benefit/risk discussions at CHMP meetings

EVIDENCE-TO-DECISION TABLE FOR FRACTIONAL DOSE YELLOW FEVER VACCINATION. Yellow fever vaccine: WHO position on the use of fractional doses, June 2017

Effective Food Safety Risk Communication. Professor Lynn J Frewer AFRD, Newcastle University,

Summary of responses: Consultation on determining the amount of a variable monetary penalty. April 2017

Surveillance report Published: 13 April 2017 nice.org.uk. NICE All rights reserved.

Ashoka Aptitude Test Cambridge Thinking Skills Assessment (TSA)

How could social media data be relevant to regulatory decision-making?

Request for Proposals

Surveillance report Published: 26 October 2017 nice.org.uk

PHARMACOVIGILANCE GLOSSARY

Building an evidence-based social sector in New Zealand. Prepared and presented by Dr Carolyn O Fallon September 2017

Antiarrhythmics for Atrial Fibrillation: Practical Implications of Latest Clinical Developments CME

Washington, DC, November 9, 2009 Institute of Medicine

An evidence rating scale for New Zealand

Introduction. Principles

NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR HEALTH AND CLINICAL EXCELLENCE. Single Technology Appraisal (STA)

Guideline on good pharmacovigilance practices (GVP)

Exploring and analyzing relevance and psychological drivers of rebound effects

ICH M4E(R2): Revised Guideline on Common Technical Document -- Efficacy

MOTIVATIONAL INTERVIEWING

Dr. Ken-Garfield Douglas

Re: Docket No. FDA D Presenting Risk Information in Prescription Drug and Medical Device Promotion

Communicating Benefit and Harm Information

Reporting on ethics in HTA: Methods, results and interpretation

WRAP (Wellness Recovery Action Planning) ( Recovery and WRAP Facilitators Values and Ethics

Consumer confidence and food risk analysis. Professor Lynn Frewer Food Safety and Consumer Behaviour University of Wageningen, The Netherlands

PATIENTS REPORTED OUTCOMES IN ONCOLOGY PATIENT- CENTERED DRUG DEVELOPMENT: OPPORTUNITIES & CHALLENGES

CHAPTER 2: RISK ANALYSIS

IDU Outreach Project. Program Guidelines

S.A.F.E.T.Y. TM Profile for Joe Bloggs. Joe Bloggs. Apr / 13

ADDING VALUE AND EXPERTISE FOR SUCCESSFUL MARKET ACCESS. Per Sørensen, Lundbeck A/S

Reflection paper on assessment of cardiovascular risk of medicinal products for the treatment of cardiovascular and metabolic diseases Draft

Industry Perspective on Patient Preference Information

Testing for. Prostate Cancer

A to Z OF RESEARCH METHODS AND TERMS APPLICABLE WITHIN SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH

Reporting on ethics in HTA: How to report on the methods, results and interpretation of ethics inquiry

The Danish Medicines Agency s availability strategy

Erlotinib for the first-line treatment of EGFR-TK mutation positive non-small cell lung cancer

EFSA remit & role: with focus on scientific substantiation of Health Claims made on foods EFSA meeting with IPA Europe

The Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use

Sound Off DR. GOOGLE S ROLE IN PRE-DIAGNOSIS THROUGH TREATMENT. Ipsos SMX. June 2014

Annex. Scientific conclusions and grounds for refusal presented by the European Medicines Agency

Statistical challenges of meta-analyses of randomised clinical trials in a regulatory setting

Benefit-Risk modelling of pharmaceuticals:

VOLUME B. Elements of Psychological Treatment

Process for appraising orphan and ultra-orphan medicines and medicines developed specifically for rare diseases Effective from September 2015

EUGenMed Roadmap for Including Sex & Gender in Biomedical & Public Health Research

Responsibility in the Age of Autonomous Machines

Attachment 3: Summary of Consultations for Updating the Municipal Alcohol Policy

IPAC date: May of 13

Objectives. Information proliferation. Guidelines: Evidence or Expert opinion or???? 21/01/2017. Evidence-based clinical decisions

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. Gambling and Problem Gambling in Massachusetts: Results of a Baseline Population Survey

Name: Ben Cottam Job title: Policy and Communications Officer

The legally binding text is the original French version TRANSPARENCY COMMITTEE OPINION. 21 July 2010

Myers-Briggs Personality Test

Executive Summary. Final version_29 Sept 2014 Page 1

The legally binding text is the original French version TRANSPARENCY COMMITTEE OPINION. 5 January 2011

IT S ALL ABOUT EVIDENCE

The Art of being Human

Case-by-Case Regulatory toxicology testing in Drug Development in Rare or Debilitating Disease

In keeping with the Scottish Diabetes Group criteria, use should be restricted to those who:

Dronedarone for the treatment of non-permanent atrial fibrillation

Surveillance report Published: 8 June 2017 nice.org.uk. NICE All rights reserved.

Below are the 2018 end of year targets for Year 1-6 students to achieve a satisfactory grade (C Grade) for Science.

Title:Problematic computer gaming, console-gaming, and internet use among adolescents: new measurement tool and association with time use

Global Pediatric Development: We Are Making Progress. PMDA Perspective. Junko Sato, PhD PMDA

Role of the Public Health Agency of Canada in Providing Border and Travel Health Advice

Transcription:

Benefit Risk Assessment Patrick Salmon Eurordis Summer School 8 th June, 2016 1

How do we reach a positive opinion? Benefit. What s good Risks. What s not so good 2

Benefit Risk Balance benefits risks 3

Why is how we document the B/R balance important? We need to provide a transparent and scientifically sound explanation as to why we find the B/R positive or negative We need to justify/explain the wording of the indication and all other important information in the SmPC (contraindications, warnings etc). For whom? Doctors, patients, companies, HTAs etc 4

Benefit-Risk Assessment The comparative evaluation or weighing of benefits (positive effects) and risks (potential harm) of various medical options for treatment, prophylaxis, prevention or diagnosis Benefit-risk balance is the cornerstone of the regulatory approval process and is key to protecting public health and individual patients However, there is no standard methodology Each case is different and benefit risk evolves 5

Benefit risk is complex The regulatory decision taken at population level is distinct from the treatment decision taken for the individual patient, and a positive regulatory decision based on objective findings does not exclude a negative benefit-risk balance for an individual. In addition, personal preferences of individual patients may mean that benefits and risks are perceived and weighed differently. 6

How do we decide? The regulators decision-rule: do the benefits outweigh the risks? is the degree of uncertainty around B & R acceptably low? B - H - U (benefits, harms, uncertainty) 7

8 Benefits, Harms, Uncertainty

9

10 Rimonabant

11

12 EMA

13 Initial Workshop to consider B/R

14

The Unknown As we know, There are known knowns. There are things we know we know. We also know There are known unknowns. That is to say We know there are some things We do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns, The ones we don't know We don't know. 15

Consider a new heart attack drug There is a risk this drug won t lower your risk and there are risks from taking the drug. 16

Consider a new heart attack drug There is a risk this drug won t lower your risk and there are risks from taking the drug. Risk 1: possibility you are a non-responder 17

Consider a new heart attack drug There is a risk this drug won t lower your risk and there are risks from taking the drug. Risk 1: possibility you are a non-responder Risk 2: your probability of a heart attack 18

Consider a new heart attack drug There is a risk this drug won t lower your risk and there are risks from taking the drug. Risk 1: possibility you are a non-responder Risk 2: your probability of a heart attack Risk 3: possible side effects 19

Consider a new heart attack drug There is a risk this drug won t lower your risk and there are risks from taking the drug. Risk 1: possibility you are a non-responder Risk 2: your probability of a heart attack Risk 3: possible side effects Which of these risks are balanced in a regulator s benefit-risk assessment? 20

Opinion: Bridging the efficacy effectiveness gap: a regulator's perspective on addressing variability of drug response Drug regulatory agencies should ensure that the benefits of drugs outweigh their risks, but licensed medicines sometimes do not perform as expected in everyday clinical practice. Failure may relate to lower than anticipated efficacy or a higher than anticipated incidence or severity of adverse effects. Here we show that the problem of benefit risk is to a considerable degree a problem of variability in drug response. We describe biological and behavioural sources of variability and how these contribute to the long-known efficacy effectiveness gap. In this context, efficacy describes how a drug performs under conditions of clinical trials, whereas effectiveness describes how it performs under conditions of everyday clinical practice. 21

22 Clarifying the meaning of benefit and risk

Benefit-Risk Assessment Template Benefits Beneficial effects Uncertainty in the knowledge about the benefits Risks Unfavourable effects Uncertainty in the knowledge about the risks Balance Importance of favourable and unfavourable effects Benefit-risk balance Discussion on the benefit-risk assessment Conclusions 23 23

Discussion on the benefit-risk assessment Describe how the balance of favourable and unfavourable effects changes depending on the uncertainties. For example, a high uncertainty in terms of important favourable effects may generally reduce their value. In terms of unfavourable effects, however, a high uncertainty about the safety will generally increase concerns about certain safety aspects. If information is available, describe how the value judgements could change depending on the perspectives of different stakeholders (physicians, patients, etc.). Is the benefit-risk balance expected to be the same over the time of treatment? Discuss different expert views if available Discuss the need for restrictions to product availability or usage, or any other conditions or measures aiming to improve the benefit-risk balance Discuss the need for further studies Conclude on the overall benefit-risk balance for the whole indication, and for different subgroups of the indication if necessary 24

25 Any questions?