DOCSLIB.ORG

Registration, Results Reporting, and Publication Bias of Clinical Trials Supporting FDA Approval of Neuropsychiatric Drugs Befor

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Registration, Results Reporting, and Publication Bias of Clinical Trials Supporting FDA Approval of Neuropsychiatric Drugs Befor Zou et al. Trials (2018) 19:581 https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-018-2957-0 RESEARCH Open Access Registration, results reporting, and publication bias of clinical trials supporting FDA approval of neuropsychiatric drugs before and after FDAAA: a retrospective cohort study Constance X. Zou1, Jessica E. Becker2,3,4, Adam T. Phillips5, James M. Garritano1, Harlan M. Krumholz6,7,8, Jennifer E. Miller9 and Joseph S. Ross7,8,9* Abstract Background: Mandatory trial registration, and later results reporting, were proposed to mitigate selective clinical trial publication and outcome reporting. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Amendments Act (FDAAA) was enacted by Congress on September 27, 2007, requiring the registration of all non-phase I clinical trials involving FDA- regulated medical interventions and results reporting for approved drugs. The association between FDAAA enactment and the registration, results reporting, and publication bias of neuropsychiatric trials has not been studied. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of all efficacy trials supporting FDA new drug approvals between 2005 to 2014 for neuropsychiatric indications. Trials were categorized as pre- or post-FDAAA based on initiation and/or completion dates. The main outcomes were the proportions of trials registered and reporting results in ClinicalTrials.gov, and the degree of publication bias, estimated using the relative risks pre- and post-FDAAA of both the publication of positive vs non-positive trials, as well as of publication of positive vs non-positive trials without misleading interpretations. Registration and results reporting proportions were compared pre- and post-FDAAA using the two-tailed Fisher exact test, and the degrees of publication bias were compared by calculating the ratio of relative risks (RRR) for each period. Results: The FDA approved 37 new drugs for neuropsychiatric indications between 2005 and 2014 on the basis of 142 efficacy trials, of which 101 were pre-FDAAA and 41 post-FDAAA. Post-FDAAA trials were significantly more likely to be registered (100% vs 64%; p < 0.001) and report results (100% vs 10%; p < 0.001) than pre-FDAAA trials. Pre-FDAAA, positive trials were more likely to be published (relative risk [RR] = 1.52; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.17–1.99; p = 0.002) and published without misleading interpretations (RR = 2.47; CI = 1.57–3.73; p < 0.001) than those with non-positive results. In contrast, post-FDAAA positive trials were equally likely to have been published (RR = 1; CI = 1–1, p = NA) and published without misleading interpretations (RR = 1.20; CI = 0.84–1.72; p = 0.30). The likelihood of publication bias pre-FDAAA vs post-FDAAA was greater for positive vs non-positive trials (RRR = 1.52; CI = 1.16–1.99; p = 0.002) and for publication without misleading interpretations (RRR = 2.06, CI = 1.17–3.61, p =0.01). (Continued on next page) * Correspondence: [email protected] 7Department of Health Policy and Management, Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, CT, USA 8Center for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Yale-New Haven Hospital, New Haven, CT, USA Full list of author information is available at the end of the article © The Author(s). 2018 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. Zou et al. Trials (2018) 19:581 Page 2 of 11 (Continued from previous page) Conclusions: The enactment of FDAAA was followed by significantly higher proportions of trials that were registered and reporting results on ClinicalTrials.gov and significantly lower degrees of publication bias among trials supporting recent FDA approval of drugs for neuropsychiatric indications. Keywords: FDAAA, ClinicalTrials.gov, Clinical trial registration, Clinical trial results, Selective publication, Publication bias Background biological products, or devices. The FDAAA mandated Research suggests that as many as 15–50% of completed that sponsors and investigators register all such trials in clinical studies are never published [1–10] and that pub- ClinicalTrials.gov prior to subject enrollment and report lication bias persists: trials with non-positive results are results to ClinicalTrials.gov within 30 days post approval significantly more likely to remain unpublished than tri- of the indication being studied. The FDAAA is applic- als with positive results [3, 11–15]. Although under- or able to trials that began after September 27, 2007 and to non-publication of clinical trials is a problem ubiquitous earlier trials that were still ongoing as of December 26, in medicine and science, many considered the problems 2007. Inappropriately delayed registration and results to be particularly severe among clinical studies in neur- reporting, as well as reporting of false results, are pun- ology and psychiatry [16]. Clinical studies supporting ap- ishable by fines of up to $10,000 per day and can lead to proved drugs for neuropsychiatric indications, such as withholding of funding from studies receiving federal paroxetine (Paxil) [17], reboxetine (Edronax) [18], gaba- support. pentin (Neurontin) [19], and lamotrigine (Lamictal) [20], It has now been ten years since the FDAAA was have been identified as being subject to underreporting. enacted. Its impact on clinical trial registration, results Data demonstrating these drugs to be potentially inef- reporting, and publication bias has largely remained un- fective for approved indications or suggesting harm were determined. One recent study demonstrated that the not publicly disclosed until the pharmaceutical compan- FDAAA was associated with increased registration and ies’ internal documents were reviewed during legal pro- publication of clinical studies of new drugs approved to ceedings [16, 21, 22]. Similarly, among trials evaluating treat cardiovascular disease and diabetes [35]. However, drugs indicated for depression [7], anxiety [23], and no study has focused on trials involving drugs treating psychotic disorders [24] that were first approved by the neurological and psychiatric conditions, an area in which US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in recent de- concern for selective publication and outcome reporting cades, 80–90% of trials with negative or equivocal results remains. were either not published or were published in a mis- The objective of our study was to compare the propor- leading manner to suggest a positive result, while nearly tions of trials that were registered and reporting results 100% of trials with positive results were published. on ClinicalTrials.gov, as well as the degree of publication A publicly accessible, centralized trial registry can pre- bias, before and after the FDAAA, among clinical trials vent clinical trials from remaining hidden by allowing in- supporting FDA approval of drugs for neuropsychiatric terested individuals, including patients, clinicians, and indications. We designed a retrospective cohort study regulators, to identify all trials relevant to a specific using a cohort of clinical trials that were submitted to medical condition or to a specific medical product. In and reviewed by the FDA for the approval of New Drug 1997, Congress passed the FDA Modernization Act Applications (NDAs) between 2005 and 2014 for the (FDAMA), which mandated the first USA-based public treatment of neurologic and psychiatric conditions. For registry ClinicalTrials.gov [25] in 2000, maintained by each trial, we determined their FDAAA eligibility based the National Institutes of Health (NIH) [26]. In 2005, on trial initiation and/or completion dates [34], as well the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors as their registration, results reporting, and publication (ICMJE) issued a policy requiring trial registration as a status. condition of publication in member journals [27], which was followed by an increase in registered trials [28–31]. Methods Nonetheless, the FDAMA only required registration of a Data sources small number of trials, while the ICMJE recommenda- Data were obtained from three sources: Drugs@FDA tion was only followed on a voluntary basis and still per- [36], ClinicalTrials.gov, and PubMed’s listing of mitted publication of unregistered trials [32, 33]. MEDLINE-indexed journals. Drugs@FDA is a public In 2007, Congress passed the FDA Amendments Act database maintained by the FDA, providing access to (FDAAA) [34], applicable to essentially all non-phase I regulatory actions and documents issued for each drug interventional studies involving FDA-regulated drugs, approved by the agency. ClinicalTrials.gov is a public Zou et al. Trials (2018) 19:581 Page 3 of 11 clinical trial registry database maintained by the National FDA, or at times not assigned by the FDA and thus de- Library of Medicine at the NIH [25]. PubMed’s list of termined using a previously described method [38]. MEDLINE-indexed journals includes more than 5500 biomedical journals. Determination of FDAAA status The FDAAA, as enacted in 2007, clarified that new re- quirements would apply to trials that were initiated after Novel therapeutics approved
Load more

Recommended publications
  • !Hcl^S Office Filed Under Seal
    IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT P FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS !^D !HCL^S OFFICE Civil Action No. 03-10641-NG-RWZ Civil Action No. 11-10398-NG-RWZ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et at, ex rel GREGORY W. THORPE and BLAIR HAMRICK, Plaintiffs, v. SMITH KLINE BEECHAM, INC., and GLAXOSMITHKLINE PLC d/b/a GLAXOSMITHKLINE, Defendants. SEVENTH AMENDED COMPLAINT FILED UNDER SEAL PURSUANT TO 31 U.S.C. §§ 3729 etseq. Matthew J. Fogelman, Esquire FOGELMAN & FOGELMAN LLC 100 Wells Avenue William J. Leonard, pro hac vice Newton, MA 02459 Richard P. Limburg, pro hac vice Kimberly D. Sutton, pro hac vice Brian P. Kenney Alex P. Basilevsky,/>/"6> hac vice M. Tavy Deming OBERMAYER REBMANN MAXWELL & Emily C. Lambert HIPPEL LLP KENNEY & McCAFFERTY, PC One Perm Center, 19th floor 3031 Walton Road, Suite C202 1617 John F. Kennedy Boulevard Plymouth Meeting, PA 19462 Philadelphia, PA 19103 A Homeys for Plaintiffs-Relators Gregory W. Thorpe and Blair Hamrick 4612364 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. BACKGROUND.....................................................................................................2 II. PARTIES ................................................................................................................4 III. JURISDICTION AND VENUE............................................................................6 IV. GENERAL ALLEGATIONS...............................................................................7 A. Drugs Marketed By GSK For Off-Label Use...............................................12 1. Advair ...................................................................................................13
    [Show full text]
  • Sleepless No More SUB.1000.0001.1077
    SUB.1000.0001.1077 2019 Submission - Royal Commission into Victoria's Mental Health System Organisation Name: Sleepless No More SUB.1000.0001.1077 1. What are your suggestions to improve the Victorian community’s understanding of mental illness and reduce stigma and discrimination? Australia is unfortunately a country with pervasive Incorrect Information, Lack of Information, Unsubstantiated Information and Out of Date Information about mental health, emotional health and the underlying reasons for emotional challenges. The reason people do not understand emotional challenges, being promoted as “mental illness”, is that they are not being given full and correct, up to date and relevant information. The Australian public is being given information which is coming from the ‘mental health industry’ not information that reduces mental health problems. The information is industry driven. “Follow the money” is a phrase very relevant in this field. People need to be given correct information that empowers them and ensures that they continue to be emotionally resilient. The information being promoted, marketed as ‘de-stigmatising mental health’ has resulted in people incorrectly self-diagnosing and presenting to their medical professionals asking for help with their anxiety (mental health problem), depression (mental health problem), bipolar (mental health problem), etc. Examples of information and mental health developments I do not see mentioned or promoted in Australia as part of making Australians emotionally resilient, and therefore not diagnosed and medicated as mentally ill: The flaws in the clinical trial process, and how to check the strategies being promoted by health care professionals, the government, doctors and psychiatrists. Making Medicines Safer for All of Us.
    [Show full text]
  • What Influences Healthcare Providers' Prescribing Decisions?
    Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy xxx (xxxx) xxx Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/rsap What influenceshealthcare providers’ prescribing decisions? Results from a national survey Simani M. Price a,*, Amie C. O’Donoghue b, Lou Rizzo a, Saloni Sapru a, Kathryn J. Aikin b a Westat, Inc., Rockville, MD, USA b U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD, USA ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Keywords: Background: Prior U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) surveys with healthcare providers (HCPs) have Healthcare providers focused on attitudes toward direct-to-consumer advertising and have not specifically examined professionally- Prescription drug promotion targeted prescription drug promotion. Similarly, there are no recent national surveys of HCPs examining their Detailing interactions with the pharmaceutical industry. Pharmaceutical opinion leaders Objectives: The goal of this study was to use a national sample of HCPs to examine exposure to professionally- Off-label prescribing Prescribers targeted prescription drug promotions and interactions with industry, and knowledge, attitudes and practices related to FDA approval of prescription drugs. Methods: An online national survey was conducted with 2000 HCPs representing primary care physicians (PCPs), specialists (SPs), physician assistants (PAs), and nurse practitioners (NPs). The sample was randomly drawn from WebMD’s Medscape subscriber network, stratified by HCP group, and designed to yield target numbers of completed surveys in each group. Weights were computed to correct for unequal selection probabilities, dif­ ferential response rates, and differential coverage and used to generalize completed surveys to a national pop­ ulation of PCPs, SPs, NPs, and PAs.
    [Show full text]
  • A Quantitative Analysis of the Value-Enhancing Effects of Nicotine
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Theses, Dissertations, and Student Research: Psychology, Department of Department of Psychology Fall 12-4-2014 A Quantitative Analysis of the Value-Enhancing Effects of Nicotine, Bupropion, and Varenicline in Male and Female Rats Scott aB rrett University of Nebraska-Lincoln, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/psychdiss Part of the Behavioral Neurobiology Commons, Biological Psychology Commons, Experimental Analysis of Behavior Commons, and the Pharmacology Commons Barrett, Scott, "A Quantitative Analysis of the Value-Enhancing Effects of Nicotine, Bupropion, and Varenicline in Male and Female Rats" (2014). Theses, Dissertations, and Student Research: Department of Psychology. 70. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/psychdiss/70 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Psychology, Department of at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses, Dissertations, and Student Research: Department of Psychology by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. A QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE VALUE-ENHANCING EFFECTS OF NICOTINE, BUPROPION, AND VARENICLINE IN MALE AND FEMALE RATS by Scott Taylor Barrett A DISSERTATION Presented to the Faculty of The Graduate College at the University of Nebraska In Partial Fulfillment of Requirements For the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Major: Psychology Under the Supervision of Professor Rick A. Bevins Lincoln, Nebraska November, 2014 A QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE VALUE-ENHANCING EFFECTS OF NICOTINE, BUPROPION, AND VARENICLINE IN MALE AND FEMALE RATS Scott Taylor Barrett, Ph.D. University of Nebraska, 2014 Advisor: Rick A. Bevins Smoking and tobacco dependence are serious health concerns in the United States and globally.
    [Show full text]
  • Modifications to the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States To
    U.S. International Trade Commission COMMISSIONERS Shara L. Aranoff, Chairman Daniel R. Pearson, Vice Chairman Deanna Tanner Okun Charlotte R. Lane Irving A. Williamson Dean A. Pinkert Address all communications to Secretary to the Commission United States International Trade Commission Washington, DC 20436 U.S. International Trade Commission Washington, DC 20436 www.usitc.gov Modifications to the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States to Implement the Dominican Republic- Central America-United States Free Trade Agreement With Respect to Costa Rica Publication 4038 December 2008 (This page is intentionally blank) Pursuant to the letter of request from the United States Trade Representative of December 18, 2008, set forth in the Appendix hereto, and pursuant to section 1207(a) of the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act, the Commission is publishing the following modifications to the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTS) to implement the Dominican Republic- Central America-United States Free Trade Agreement, as approved in the Dominican Republic-Central America- United States Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, with respect to Costa Rica. (This page is intentionally blank) Annex I Effective with respect to goods that are entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after January 1, 2009, the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTS) is modified as provided herein, with bracketed matter included to assist in the understanding of proclaimed modifications. The following supersedes matter now in the HTS. (1). General note 4 is modified as follows: (a). by deleting from subdivision (a) the following country from the enumeration of independent beneficiary developing countries: Costa Rica (b).
    [Show full text]
  • Specialized Rehabilitation Services for Military Service Members And
    Psychopharmacologic Approaches to Affective Disorders and Executive Dysfunction after Brain Injury Mel B. Glenn, M.D. National Medical Director, NeuroRestorative Medical Director, NeuroRestorative Massachusetts & Rhode Island Audio Check To ensure that you can hear the presentation, please take a moment to double check your audio settings. Go to the Audio tab in your GoToWebinar dashboard. • If you have selected phone call, make sure you’re dialed into the conference number. • If you are dialed in but cannot hear, try hanging up and calling back in. • If you are using only computer audio, check that your device isn’t muted. • If you’re using listening devices such as headsets, double check they are plugged in/turned on. 2 NeuroRestorative’s COVID-19 Response We are committed to protecting the health and safety of the individuals we serve, our staff, and the community. Our services are considered essential, and we are taking precautions to minimize disruption to services and keep those in our care and our team members safe. In some programs, that has meant innovating our service delivery model through Interactive Telehealth Services. We provide Interactive Telehealth Services throughout the country as an alternative to in- person services. Through Interactive Telehealth Services, we deliver the same high-quality supports as we would in-person, but in an interactive, virtual format that is HIPAA compliant and recognized by most healthcare plans and carriers. You can learn more about our COVID-19 prevention and response plan at our Update Center by visiting neurorestorative.com. 3 Disclosures • Advisor, Traumatic Brain Injury Model Systems grant, National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research, U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Varenicline Criteria for Prescribing
    Varenicline Criteria Varenicline Criteria for Prescribing VA Center for Medication Safety, Tobacco Use Cessation Technical Advisory Group, Public Health Strategic Healthcare Group, VA Pharmacy Benefits Management Services, VISN Pharmacist Executives, and Medical Advisory Panel May 2008; Updated June 2008; Updated August 2008; Updated February 2010; Updated July 2011 The following recommendations are based on current medical evidence and expert opinion from clinicians. The content of the document is dynamic and will be revised as new clinical data becomes available. The purpose of this document is to assist practitioners in clinical decision-making, to standardize and improve the quality of patient care, and to promote cost-effective drug prescribing. The clinician should utilize this guidance and interpret it in the clinical context of individual patient situations. Introduction: Varenicline is a second-line medication for smoking cessation in the VA health care system and should be used only for those patients who have failed an appropriate trial of nicotine replacement therapy, bupropion, or combination therapy (Combination Therapy Recommendations)(or medical contraindication to these medications) within the past year. In rare instances, varenicline has been associated with violent thoughts, intent or actions toward oneself or others. Prior to starting varenicline, patients should be screened for feelings of hopelessness, which may increase the risk of suicide once the medication is started. Patients should also be screened for current suicidal ideation or intent as well as a history of past suicide attempts. The recommended screening questions for suicide/violence risk are in Box 1, below: Patients who are positive on any of the screening questions require further evaluation by a mental health professional.
    [Show full text]
  • The Effect of Sazetidine-A and Other Nicotinic Ligands on Nicotine Controlled Goal-Tracking in Female and Male Rats
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by University of Kentucky University of Kentucky UKnowledge Pharmaceutical Sciences Faculty Publications Pharmaceutical Sciences 2-2017 The Effect of Sazetidine-A and Other Nicotinic Ligands on Nicotine Controlled Goal-Tracking in Female and Male Rats S. Charntikov University of New Hampshire A. M. Falco University of Nebraska - Lincoln K. Fink University of Nebraska - Lincoln Linda P. Dwoskin University of Kentucky, [email protected] See next page for additional authors Right click to open a feedback form in a new tab to let us know how this document benefits ou.y Follow this and additional works at: https://uknowledge.uky.edu/ps_facpub Part of the Chemicals and Drugs Commons, Neuroscience and Neurobiology Commons, and the Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences Commons Authors S. Charntikov, A. M. Falco, K. Fink, Linda P. Dwoskin, and R. A. Bevins The Effect of Sazetidine-A and Other Nicotinic Ligands on Nicotine Controlled Goal- Tracking in Female and Male Rats Notes/Citation Information Published in Neuropharmacology, v. 113, part A, p. 354-366. © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. This manuscript version is made available under the CC‐BY‐NC‐ND 4.0 license https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/. The document available for download is the author's post-peer-review final draft of the article. Digital Object Identifier (DOI) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropharm.2016.10.014 This article is available at UKnowledge: https://uknowledge.uky.edu/ps_facpub/128 HHS Public Access Author manuscript Author ManuscriptAuthor Manuscript Author Neuropharmacology Manuscript Author .
    [Show full text]
  • Index 499 Abacavir Case Study, 359 Drug Labeling And, 448 Infectious Diseases And, 317 Pharmacist And, 465 Pharmacodynamics Of
    Index 499 A Allele, 3, 8 detection of, 59, 70-71, 74, 92, 94 Abacavir discrimination, 59, 68, 70-72, 74-75, 88, 90-92, case study, 359 94 drug labeling and, 448 frequency calculations for, 34 infectious diseases and, 317 genetics and, 19, 20, 22, 28-30, 32, 34-47, 49, 52-53 pharmacist and, 465 methodologies, 59, 60, 70-75, 85-94, 96-97 pharmacodynamics of, 198 respiratory diseases and, 327, 336-338, 343, toxicogenomics of, 367 346 ABC transporters, 153-154 -specific amplifications, 92-93 ABCB1, 154-158, 160-161, 258, 263, 314 Allele-specific oligonucleotide (ASO) hybridiza- ABCC transporter family, 161-168 tion, 59, 74, 90-91 Allelic drift, 38 ABCC1, 161-162 All-trans retinoic acid (ATRA), 271 ABCC2, 162-163 Alpha-glucosidase inhibitors, 406, 421-422 ABCC3, 163 gene polymorphisms and, 425 ABCC4, 163 Alzheimer’s disease, 201, 296 ABCC5, 163 American Academy for Study of Liver Diseases, ABCC6, 166 322 American College of Cardiology, 228 ABCC8, 407-409, 410-411, 414, 446 American College of Medical Genetics working ABCC11, 166-167 group, 475 ABCG2, 167-168 American Heart Association Foundation, 228 Acamprosate, 394 American Hospital Formulary Service Drug Infor- Acarbose, 421-422 mation, 461 Americans with Disabilities Act, 479 Access issues, 474 Amino acid, 25 Accreditation Counsel for Pharmacy Education, 461 Amiodarone, 243-244 Accuracy, 72 Amitriptyline, 285 ACE inhibitors, 194-195, 200, 230, 232-233, 296 Analytical specificity, 71-72 Acenocoumarol, 222 Ancillary information, 467-468, 470, 473, 475-477, Acetaminophen, 112 480-481 Anderson,
    [Show full text]
  • Comments to Draft
    March 8, 2021 Institute for Clinical and Economic Review Two Liberty Square, Ninth Floor Boston, MA 02109 Re: Comments to Draft Evidence Report on Anti B-Cell Maturation Antigen CAR T-cell and Antibody Conjugate Therapy for Heavily Pre-Treated Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma Introduction The Alliance for Regenerative Medicine (ARM) appreciates the opportunity to submit the following comments to the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER) February 11, 2021 draft report on Anti B-Cell Maturation Antigen CAR T-cell and Antibody Conjugate Therapy for Heavily Pre-Treated Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma (“Draft Evidence Report”).1 ARM is the leading international advocacy organization dedicated to realizing the promise of regenerative medicines and advanced therapies. ARM promotes legislative, regulatory and reimbursement initiatives to advance this innovative and transformative sector, which includes cell therapies, gene therapies and tissue-based therapies. In its 11-year history, ARM has become the global voice of the sector, representing the interests of 380+ members worldwide, including small and large companies, academic research institutions, major medical centers and patient groups. Although focused on one type of rare cancer, the Draft Evidence Report raises important issues for ARM members because of its potential negative impact on the development of the therapies under review and future therapies. ARM is concerned that the timing of the review prevents ICER from taking into account the FDA’s perspective on the appropriate patient population (i.e., through the label), that of expert providers’ perspectives (i.e., through recognized compendia), and the technology’s durability. Consequently, ARM is concerned that the Draft Evidence Report may harm market and patient access.
    [Show full text]
  • Study 329: Trials Why Is It So Important?
    © July - August 2016 RIAT ; Restoring Invisible and Abandoned Study 329: Trials Why is it so important? tudy 329 is a GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) sponsored trial with S22 academic authors that compared paroxetine, imipra- mine, and placebo for adolescent depression. In this trial 275 safetysaafee adolescents with major depression were randomized in a dou- y ble-blind fashion to paroxetine (93), imipramine (95) or pla- cebo (87) for 8 weeks. Those who completed 8 weeks were efficacy studied in a 6-month continuation phase. Published 8-week results (2001)1: Compared with placebo, paroxetine demonstrated significantly greater improvement in The publications report in detail the methods used 3 selected depression rating scales and a Clinical Global Im- to re-analyze Study 329. Notably, they followed the provement score of 1 or 2. The response to imipramine was protocol (and amendments) established by GSK7 not significantly different from placebo for any measure. and used all appropriate procedural steps to avoid Authors’ conclusions: “Paroxetine is generally well tol- bias. They have also made the original anonymous erated and effective for major depression in adolescents.”1 patient data available for others to analyze. This trial has been cited over 600 times and was very influ- RIAT analysis of Study 329 ential in increasing prescribing of paroxetine in this clinical (acute phase) setting.2 The trial protocol7 specified two primary effica- Did these published conclusions reflect cy variables: change in total score on a Hamilton “reality”? depression rating scale (HAM-D) from baseline Critical appraisal of the 2001 publication would have led to endpoint, and the proportion of responders at to questions about the authors’ conclusions.
    [Show full text]
  • Nicotinic Acetylcholine Receptors
    nAChR Nicotinic acetylcholine receptors nAChRs (nicotinic acetylcholine receptors) are neuron receptor proteins that signal for muscular contraction upon a chemical stimulus. They are cholinergic receptors that form ligand-gated ion channels in the plasma membranes of certain neurons and on the presynaptic and postsynaptic sides of theneuromuscular junction. Nicotinic acetylcholine receptors are the best-studied of the ionotropic receptors. Like the other type of acetylcholine receptor-the muscarinic acetylcholine receptor (mAChR)-the nAChR is triggered by the binding of the neurotransmitter acetylcholine (ACh). Just as muscarinic receptors are named such because they are also activated by muscarine, nicotinic receptors can be opened not only by acetylcholine but also by nicotine —hence the name "nicotinic". www.MedChemExpress.com 1 nAChR Inhibitors & Modulators (+)-Sparteine (-)-(S)-B-973B Cat. No.: HY-W008350 Cat. No.: HY-114269 Bioactivity: (+)-Sparteine is a natural alkaloid acting as a ganglionic Bioactivity: (-)-(S)-B-973B is a potent allosteric agonist and positive blocking agent. (+)-Sparteine competitively blocks nicotinic allosteric modulator of α7 nAChR, with antinociceptive ACh receptor in the neurons. activity [1]. Purity: 98.0% Purity: 99.93% Clinical Data: No Development Reported Clinical Data: No Development Reported Size: 10mM x 1mL in Water, Size: 10mM x 1mL in DMSO, 100 mg 5 mg, 10 mg, 50 mg, 100 mg (±)-Epibatidine A-867744 (CMI 545) Cat. No.: HY-101078 Cat. No.: HY-12149 Bioactivity: (±)-Epibatidine is a nicotinic agonist. (±)-Epibatidine is a Bioactivity: A-867744 is a positive allosteric modulator of α7 nAChRs (IC50 neuronal nAChR agonist. values are 0.98 and 1.12 μM for human and rat α7 receptor ACh-evoked currents respectively, in X.
    [Show full text]