Stride Velocity 95th Centile: Insights into Gaining Regulatory Qualification of the First Wearable-Derived Digital Endpoint for use in Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy Trials

In 2019, stride velocity 95th centile (SV95C) became the first wearable-derived digital clinical outcome assessment (COA) qualified by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) for use as a secondary endpoint in trials for Duchenne muscular dystrophy. SV95C was approved via the EMA’s qualification pathway for novel methodologies for medicine development, which is a voluntary procedure for assessing the regulatory acceptability of innovative methods used in pharmaceutical research and development. SV95C is an objective, real-world digital ambulation measure of peak performance, representing the speed of the fastest strides taken by the wearer over a recording period of 180 hours. SV95C is correlated with traditional clinic-based assessments of motor function and has greater sensitivity to clinical change over 6 months than other wearable-derived stride variables, for example, median stride length or velocity. SV95C overcomes many limitations of episodic, clinic-based motor function testing, allowing the assessment of ambulation ability between clinic visits and under free-living conditions. Here we highlight considerations and challenges in developing SV95C using evidence generated by a high-performance wearable sensor. We also provide a commentary of the device’s technical capabilities, which were a determining factor in the regulatory approval of SV95C. This article aims to provide insights into the methods employed, and the challenges faced, during the regulatory approval process for researchers developing new digital tools for patients with diseases that affect motor function.

Extension of Indication for Authorised Oncology Products in the European Union: A Joint Effort of Multiple Stakeholders

After marketing authorisation, the development of a medicinal product often continues with studies investigating new therapeutic indications. Positive results can potentially lead to changes to the terms of the marketing authorisation, such as an extension of therapeutic indication(s). These studies can be initiated and sponsored by the marketing authorisation holder (MAH) or by others. When results from an investigator-initiated trial suggest that an authorised medicinal product is safe and effective for a new therapeutic indication, physicians may want to treat their patients with this medicinal product. In such a situation, it is desirable to extend the therapeutic indication(s) via the regulatory approval process, as this can facilitate patient access within the European Union. There may however be challenges when the MAH did not conduct the study and might not have access to the data. In this perspective, we focus on the possibilities to extend the therapeutic indication(s) of an already authorised medicinal product based on results from investigator-initiated trials. We address: (1) the advantages of an extension of indication; (2) the regulatory requirements for a variation application; (3) investigator-initiated trials as a basis for regulatory approval; (4) the role of the MAH in extending the indication. With this article, we want to emphasize the importance of a collaborative approach and dialogue between stakeholders with the aim to facilitate access to effective medicinal products.

OP223 A Semi-Automated Process To Monitor The Clinical Development And Regulatory Approval Pathway Of Innovative Medicines

IntroductionEarly identification of innovative medicines is crucial for timely health technology assessment (HTA) and efficient patient access. The National Institute for Health Research Innovation Observatory (NIHRIO) identifies, monitors and notifies key HTA stakeholders in England of ‘technologies’ (innovative medicines) within three to five years of regulatory approval. Increasing numbers of innovative medicines and significant uncertainties in clinical and regulatory pathways are major challenges in the monitoring and notification process. An active monitoring framework using pre-defined predictive criteria has previously been developed. This framework provides a standardized and consistent process, but is highly resource-intensive, requiring manual review of individual records.MethodsUsing the previous active monitoring framework, a scoring matrix was calculated and used to prioritize individual technologies using available data in the NIHRIO database: estimated regulatory timelines, regulatory awards/designations, innovative medicine type (for example gene therapies) and clinical trial phase, completion dates and results. A threshold for automatic and manual reviewing of technologies was developed and tested by NIHRIO analysts.ResultsThe scoring system identified approximately ninety percent of technologies meeting the threshold for semi-automated reviewing. The review period for these technologies are set automatically according to predefined criteria depending on data availability. The review periods are updated automatically until the record reaches the threshold that triggers manual reviewing. The remaining ten percent had estimated regulatory timelines necessitating the need for manual reviewing and early engagement with companies to verify regulatory timelines and/or notify HTA stakeholders.ConclusionsPreliminary analysis indicates that each technology is routinely and automatically updated. The semi-automatic updating represents a significant improvement in the efficiency of the monitoring of the large volume of technologies on the NIHRIO database. Ongoing work is being undertaken to further refine, pilot and test the system.This project is funded by the NIHR [(HSRIC-2016-10009)/Innovation Observatory]. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care.

Analysing the Launch of COVID-19 Vaccine National Rollouts: Nine Case Studies

In late 2020 and early 2021, with the eagerly anticipated regulatory approval of vaccines against SARS-CoV-2, the urgent global effort to inoculate populations against this devastating virus was underway. These case studies examine the early stages of COVID-19 vaccine rollouts across nine regions from around the world (Brazil, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Israel, Nigeria, Taiwan, United Kingdom and United States). By evaluating and comparing different approaches used to immunize against a novel pathogen, it is possible to learn a great deal about which methods were successful, and in which areas strategies can be improved. This information is applicable to the ongoing global vaccination against this virus, as well as in the event of future pandemics. Research was conducted by following and tracking the progress of vaccine rollouts in the nine regions, using published clinical trials, government documents and news reports as sources of data. Results relate to the proportion of populations that had received at least one COVID-19 dose by 28 February 2021. Outcomes are discussed in the context of three key pillars integral to all immunization programs: procurement of vaccines, communication with the public and distribution of doses to individuals.

Availability and Accessibility of Essential Drugs for Rare Disorders in Canada

In 2021, the Rare Disease Treatment Access Working Group (RDTAWG) of the International Rare Diseases Research Consortium, a European Union funded organization, published a list of medicinal products that they considered to be essential for the treatment of rare conditions. This study assesses the availability and accessibility of the RDTAWG medicines in Canada by comparing whether the rare disorder medicines approved for marketing in the United States also had regulatory approval for the same indication in Canada, and whether those medicines are ultimately covered under the 10 provincial government drug plans and the federal Non-Insured Health Benefits plan for indigenous persons. Data available at the end of August 2021 were accessed from the relevant online drug formularies. Most (85%) of the medicines with regulatory approval in the United States were also approved for the same indication in Canada. However, only just over half were covered by either open or conditional access in government drug plans, with the proportion ranging from under 36% in Manitoba to two-thirds in New Brunswick. Approximately 20% of the medicines had open access in all the plans, whereas the proportion with conditional access ranged from 13% in Manitoba to 45% in Ontario and New Brunswick. The average rate of coverage for medicines for disorders with a prevalence of ≤1 per 100,000 was only 28%, compared with 56% for disorders with a prevalence ranging from >1 case per 100,000 persons up to 1 case per 10,000 persons, and 60% for disorders with a prevalence of >1 case per 10,000 persons. Access to many medicines regarded by experts in the RDTAWG as essential for the welfare of individuals with rare disorders is inadequate to poor in Canada, especially for ultra-rare conditions. The federal Liberals and NDP are keen to introduce some type of national pharmacare. Any program developed by Canada’s governments must ensure that Canadians will have publicly funded access to all rare disorder medicines.