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use of externally controlled trials in all but a very limited number of situations truly ripe for such an approach; new draft guidance discusses at length the various confounding factors that can introduce bias into a comparison between an investigational treatment and an external control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...
External Controls: Sarepta’s DMD Gene Therapy Not In the Same Boat As Zolgensma, US FDA Says
Sarepta conducted study-level and integrated-level comparison analyses of SRP-9001-treated patients and external controls. However, heterogeneous nature of DMD and potentially moderate treatment effect of SRP-9001 distinguish it from Novaritis' spinal muscular atrophy treatment, where natural history data were used to support single-arm trial results, the FDA said.
GSK Defends Against US FDA Doubts About Jemperli Confirmatory Trial Feasibility
ODAC meeting on dostarlimab rectal cancer development program highlights issues at top of mind for the agency, including whether a proposed randomized trial in a different setting can be completed, timeline for development of evidence to verify clinical benefit, and challenges with using external controls for single-arm studies.
Real-World Evidence: Amylyx’s Use Of External Controls To Frame Relyvrio’s Survival Benefit Rife With Problems
The post hoc comparison of an exploratory, long-term survival benefit in the CENTAUR trial to historical controls in two ALS patient databases lacked prespecification and a common treatment protocol, and potential differences in prognostic factors may have confounded the results.