External Controls: FDA Guidance Provides Clarity But Does Little To Remove Hurdles
Executive Summary
Agency discourages use of externally controlled trials in all but a very limited number of situations truly ripe for such an approach; new draft guidance discusses at length the various confounding factors that can introduce bias into a comparison between an investigational treatment and an external control using either real-world data or data from another clinical trial.
You may also be interested in...
RWE: Non-Interventional Studies Must Be Able To Distinguish A True Treatment Effect, US FDA Says
Agency describes a host of issues sponsors should consider and address before pursuing observational or case-control studies to support regulatory decision-making on drug efficacy or safety; new draft guidance was issued under the FDA’s Real-World Evidence program.
US WorldMeds’ Neuroblastoma Drug: External Controls, Confirmatory Evidence, And A Concern About Precedent
US FDA officials said the high-quality nature of the patient-level data used in the external control arm, and the use of animal models considered to be translatable, justify reliance upon a nontraditional data package for eflornithine (DFMO) in high-risk neuroblastoma, but some adcomm members worry that an approval will open the door too widely for others to follow.
Real-World Data Can Include EUA Observations, US FDA Final Guidance Says
Agency clarifies expectations for non-interventional studies providing RWD to support regulatory decisions while continuing to emphasize familiar themes around early interaction and stringent data practices.