Clementine Nordon1, Helene Karcher2, Rolf H H Groenwold3, Mikkel Zöllner Ankarfeldt4, Franz Pichler5, Helene Chevrou-Severac6, Michel Rossignol7, Adeline Abbe8, Lucien Abenhaim2. 1. LASER Research, Paris, France. Electronic address: clementine.nordon@la-ser.com. 2. LASER Analytica, London, UK. 3. Julius Centre for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands. 4. Novo Nordisk A/S, Soborg, Denmark. 5. Eli Lilly and Company, Melrose Park, Australia. 6. Takeda Pharmaceuticals International, Glattpark-Opfikon, Switzerland. 7. Department of Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Occupational Health, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. 8. Sanofi R&D, Chilly Mazarin, France.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The concept of the "efficacy-effectiveness gap" (EEG) has started to challenge confidence in decisions made for drugs when based on randomized controlled trials alone. Launched by the Innovative Medicines Initiative, the GetReal project aims to improve understanding of how to reconcile evidence to support efficacy and effectiveness and at proposing operational solutions. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of the present narrative review were 1) to understand the historical background in which the concept of the EEG has emerged and 2) to describe the conceptualization of EEG. METHODS: A focused literature review was conducted across the gray literature and articles published in English reporting insights on the EEG concept. The identification of different "paradigms" was performed by simple inductive analysis of the documents' content. RESULTS: The literature on the EEG falls into three major paradigms, in which EEG is related to 1) real-life characteristics of the health care system; 2) the method used to measure the drug's effect; and 3) a complex interaction between the drug's biological effect and contextual factors. CONCLUSIONS: The third paradigm provides an opportunity to look beyond any dichotomy between "standardized" versus "real-life" characteristics of the health care system and study designs. Namely, future research will determine whether the identification of these contextual factors can help to best design randomized controlled trials that provide better estimates of drugs' effectiveness.
BACKGROUND: The concept of the "efficacy-effectiveness gap" (EEG) has started to challenge confidence in decisions made for drugs when based on randomized controlled trials alone. Launched by the Innovative Medicines Initiative, the GetReal project aims to improve understanding of how to reconcile evidence to support efficacy and effectiveness and at proposing operational solutions. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of the present narrative review were 1) to understand the historical background in which the concept of the EEG has emerged and 2) to describe the conceptualization of EEG. METHODS: A focused literature review was conducted across the gray literature and articles published in English reporting insights on the EEG concept. The identification of different "paradigms" was performed by simple inductive analysis of the documents' content. RESULTS: The literature on the EEG falls into three major paradigms, in which EEG is related to 1) real-life characteristics of the health care system; 2) the method used to measure the drug's effect; and 3) a complex interaction between the drug's biological effect and contextual factors. CONCLUSIONS: The third paradigm provides an opportunity to look beyond any dichotomy between "standardized" versus "real-life" characteristics of the health care system and study designs. Namely, future research will determine whether the identification of these contextual factors can help to best design randomized controlled trials that provide better estimates of drugs' effectiveness.
Authors: Michael D Tharp; Jonathan A Bernstein; Abhishek Kavati; Benjamin Ortiz; Karen MacDonald; Kris Denhaerynck; Ivo Abraham; Christopher S Lee Journal: JAMA Dermatol Date: 2019-01-01 Impact factor: 10.282
Authors: Lars Børty; Rasmus F Brøndum; Heidi S Christensen; Charles Vesteghem; Marianne Severinsen; Søren P Johnsen; Lars H Ehlers; Ursula Falkmer; Laurids Ø Poulsen; Martin Bøgsted Journal: Eur J Health Econ Date: 2022-08-26
Authors: Gloria D Coronado; Amanda F Petrik; William M Vollmer; Stephen H Taplin; Erin M Keast; Scott Fields; Beverly B Green Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2018-09-01 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Irene Eriksson; Thomas Cars; Fredrik Piehl; Rickard E Malmström; Björn Wettermark; Mia von Euler Journal: Eur J Clin Pharmacol Date: 2017-11-11 Impact factor: 2.953