The relevance of therapeutic positioning in the post-approval evaluation of new medicines.

Autor:	Alegre-Del Rey EJ; Servicio de Farmacia, Hospital Universitario Puerto Real, Cádiz, España. Electronic address: emilioj.alegre.sspa@juntadeandalucia.es., Fénix-Caballero S; Servicio de Farmacia, Hospital Universitario Puerto Real, Cádiz, España., Fraga Fuentes MD; Área de Farmacia, Dirección General de Planificación, Ordenación e Inspección Sanitaria y Farmacia, Consejería de Sanidad, Toledo, España., Cárdenas Aranzana MJ; Servicio de Farmacia, Hospital Universitario Reina Sofía, Córdoba, España., Lopez-Briz E; Servicio de Farmacia, Hospital Universitario y Politécnico La Fe, Valencia, España., Puigventós Latorre F; Servicio de Farmacia, Hospital Universitario Son Espases (Jubilado), Palma de Mallorca, España., Domínguez-Santana CM; Servicio de Farmacia, Hospital Universitario Puerto Real, Cádiz, España.
Jazyk:	English; Spanish; Castilian
Zdroj:	Farmacia hospitalaria : organo oficial de expresion cientifica de la Sociedad Espanola de Farmacia Hospitalaria [Farm Hosp] 2024 Jul 19. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 Jul 19.
DOI:	10.1016/j.farma.2024.06.001
Abstrakt:	The objective of regulatory authorities is to ensure a favorable risk-benefit balance for medicines in their licensed indication, without seeking to establish their place in the therapeutic armamentarium beyond that. The licensed indication covers heterogeneous subpopulations and often does not sufficiently specify the characteristics of the patients who may benefit. The regulatory information does not always show the benefit over the standard treatments; moreover, it only reacts to the conditions specified in the developer's application, and lacks an assessment of the clinical relevance of the benefit and its uncertainties. Many cases highlight the need to establish a more specific therapeutic benefit scenario than the licensed indication. For example, abemaciclib was approved in the adjuvant setting for high-risk patients with early breast cancer, but the appropriate level of risk and how to assess it needs to be specified. Also, pembrolizumab is approved for neoadjuvant plus adjuvant treatment in lung cancer; but it remains to be analyzed whether it is superior to nivolumab in neoadjuvant treatment alone, which involves less treatment and economic burden. As therapeutic positioning is always a necessary decision, whether made at a national, regional, local or individual level, it must be made in the most appropriate way. The absence of a multidisciplinary discussion and consensus, relying only on individual decisions to determine positioning from the outset, underestimates information gaps, inter-individual variability and the influence of drug promotion. It can be harmful and costly. To properly manage the introduction of new medicines, it is essential to establish their benefit scenario in a multidisciplinary way. This, together with consideration of the clinical benefit provided versus the appropriate alternatives and the uncertainties of the benefit, constitutes the objective of the clinical assessment and the basis for designing a well-focused economic analysis. This allows policy makers to make the most appropriate decisions on pricing and funding new treatments. In an ideal situation, the benefit scenario considered for the new medicine would coincide with the one established for funding, but costs that are difficult to bear may lead to restrictions and affect the final positioning after the economic and budgetary impact assessment. (Copyright © 2024. Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.U.)
Databáze:	MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu