Literature DB >> 23739537

The future of population-based postmarket drug risk assessment: a regulator's perspective.

T A Hammad1, G A Neyarapally, S Iyasu, J A Staffa, G Dal Pan.   

Abstract

The US Food and Drug Administration emphasizes the role of regulatory science in the fulfillment of its mission to promote and protect public health and foster innovation. With respect to the evaluation of drug effects in the real world, regulatory science plays an important role in drug risk assessment and management. This article discusses opportunities and challenges with population-based drug risk assessment as well as related regulatory science knowledge gaps in the following areas: (i) population-based data sources and methods to evaluate drug safety issues; (ii) evidence-based thresholds to account for uncertainty in postmarket data; (iii) approaches to optimize the integration and interpretation of evidence from different sources; and (iv) approaches to evaluate the real-world impact of regulatory decisions. Regulators should continue the ongoing dialogue with multiple stakeholders to strengthen regulatory safety science and address these and other critical knowledge gaps.

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23739537     DOI: 10.1038/clpt.2013.118

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther        ISSN: 0009-9236            Impact factor:   6.875


  8 in total

1.  Cardiovascular safety signals with dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors: A disproportionality analysis among high-risk patients.

Authors:  Sheriza N Baksh; Mara McAdams-DeMarco; Jodi B Segal; G Caleb Alexander
Journal:  Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf       Date:  2018-04-14       Impact factor: 2.890

2.  Giving Patients a Meaningful Voice in United States Regulatory Decision Making: The Role for Health Preference Research.

Authors:  F Reed Johnson; Kathleen Beusterien; Semra Özdemir; Leslie Wilson
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 3.883

3.  Reporting of clinical trial safety results in ClinicalTrials.gov for FDA-approved drugs: A cross-sectional analysis.

Authors:  Krista Y Chen; Erin M Borglund; Emma Charlotte Postema; Adam G Dunn; Florence T Bourgeois
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2022-04-28       Impact factor: 2.599

4.  A decline in depression treatment following FDA antidepressant warnings largely explains racial/ethnic disparities in prescription fills.

Authors:  Nicholas J Carson; Ana M Progovac; Ye Wang; Benjamin L Cook
Journal:  Depress Anxiety       Date:  2017-09-29       Impact factor: 6.505

Review 5.  Benefit-Risk of Therapies for Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis: Testing the Number Needed to Treat to Benefit (NNTB), Number Needed to Treat to Harm (NNTH) and the Likelihood to be Helped or Harmed (LHH): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Diogo Mendes; Carlos Alves; Francisco Batel-Marques
Journal:  CNS Drugs       Date:  2016-10       Impact factor: 6.497

6.  Useful Interplay Between Spontaneous ADR Reports and Electronic Healthcare Records in Signal Detection.

Authors:  Alexandra C Pacurariu; Sabine M Straus; Gianluca Trifirò; Martijn J Schuemie; Rosa Gini; Ron Herings; Giampiero Mazzaglia; Gino Picelli; Lorenza Scotti; Lars Pedersen; Peter Arlett; Johan van der Lei; Miriam C Sturkenboom; Preciosa M Coloma
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2015-12       Impact factor: 5.606

7.  Can social media data lead to earlier detection of drug-related adverse events?

Authors:  Mei Sheng Duh; Pierre Cremieux; Marc Van Audenrode; Francis Vekeman; Paul Karner; Haimin Zhang; Paul Greenberg
Journal:  Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf       Date:  2016-09-07       Impact factor: 2.890

Review 8.  Structured benefit-risk evaluation for medicinal products: review of quantitative benefit-risk assessment findings in the literature.

Authors:  Marie-Laure Kürzinger; Ludivine Douarin; Ievgeniia Uzun; Chantal El-Haddad; William Hurst; Juhaeri Juhaeri; Stéphanie Tcherny-Lessenot
Journal:  Ther Adv Drug Saf       Date:  2020-12-08
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.