Median Box : 25th and 75th percentiles

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

The Role of the IRB An Institutional Review Board (IRB) is a review committee established to help protect the rights and welfare of human research subjects.

Advertisements

Pricing and Reimbursement Policies 27. Pricing Policies Patented Medicines Patented Medicine Prices Review Board (PMPRB) monitors and sets the price of.

Keith Tolley, Director, Tolley Health Economics Ltd IDF Europe Symposium 30 th September Tolley Health Economics Ltd Strategic Consulting in Health.

The evolving role of real-world evidence to support policy and practice CADTH 2015.

Integrating CMC Review & Inspection Industry Recommendations Joe Anisko April 24, 2003.

The Pursuit of Better Medicines through Genetic Research Terri Arledge, DVM US Department Head Drug Development Genetics.

International Experience in Pharmaceutical Services for Promoting Access to Medicines: Canada, Cuba, England, Mexico International Seminar on the Challenges.

Professor Stuart Walker BSc PhD MFPM FIBiol FRSC FRCPath FIstD Director CMR International UK.

Michelle Boudreau, Vice President, Private Markets, March 11, 2015 Presentation to CADA.

Biopharmaceutical Regulatory Requirements 40. Marketing Authorization for New Chemical Entities Health Canada’s (HC) Therapeutic Products Directorate.

Current Approaches in European Health Care Policy What models can balance the needs of payors and industry?

Pharmacovigilance obligations of the Pharmaceutical companies in India

Industry Perspective on Challenges for Product Developers - Drugs Christine Allison, M.S., RAC Associate Regulatory Consultant, Global Regulatory Affairs.

Benchmarking Canadian HTA Agency and Provincial Payer Decision-Making Allen N. 1,2, Liberti L. 2, Salek M.S. 1 1 Centre for socioeconomic research, School.

FDA’s Role in Encouraging Innovation in Combination Products Danelle R. Miller, Esq. Regulatory Counsel, Roche Diagnostics For The Combination Products.

The Pharmaceutical Industry in Turkey

1 Bioequivalence of Highly Variable Drugs: Regulatory Perspectives Sam H. Haidar, R.Ph., Ph.D. Pharmacometrics Office of Generic Drugs.

“We work to prevent and are prepared to respond to threats to our health and safety through coordinated efforts across the country and around the world.”

International Pharmaceutical Regulation and Compliance Comparisons and Contrasts Lester M. Crawford, PhD.

General Aspects of Quality assessment of multisource interchangeable medicines Rutendo Kuwana Technical Officer, WHO, Geneva Training workshop: Assessment.

Risk Management Standards and Guidelines

Process mapping of registration to reimbursement for new pharmaceuticals in UK.

1 Risk Intervention Study: Cisapride Evelyn M Rodriguez MD, MPH Director, DDREII, OPDRA.

The association between European Medicines Agency approval and Health Technology Assessment recommendations Iga Lipska 1,2, Anke Hövels 2, Neil McAuslane.

An independent voice on the ongoing debate about reforming the HTA system in the UK Presentation for Cancer52 14 July 2015 Leela Barham

1 SAE Centralized Report and Review Process April 2012.

MEP Interest Group on Brain, Mind and Pain

GD211 Training Module 5 Conclusions.

2016 Commonwealth Fund International Health Policy Survey of Adults in Eleven Countries May 18th, 2017.

Interactive Session: Presentation of Scenarios and Q&A

Figure 3. BLA and NME Drugs Sponsored by US companies ( )

Hard Data: Data Collection Mechanisms on Human Trafficking in the Baltic Sea Region Expert Conference on Forced Labour Exploitation and Counter.

Sophie Skorupka M2 AREIPS 15 novembre 2016

Developments in North America regarding Patient Safety – what the USA are doing?/what needs to be appraised? Professor Bob Phillips, MD MSPH FAAFP Vice.

Comparing the registration to reimbursement pathway for new active substances in Europe Germany Poland To help provide a better understanding of the European.

NASs approval time by therapeutic area:

Median 25th and 75th percentile

New economies: Scenarios with a likelihood >50% and impact

Introduction to TransCelerate

Median approval time for new active substances approved by ICH agencies by approval year Methodology For each new active substance (NAS) approved between.

Comparing HTA recommendations

Ten Quality Decision-Making Practices for organisational decision making for pharmaceutical company leadership team and sub-teams In order for organisations.

Median submission gap, median approval time and percentage approved as expedited for new active substances (NASs) approved by six authorities:

Median time to internationalisation

Commonwealth Fund 2016 International Health Policy Survey of Adults in 11 Countries Robin Osborn Media Teleconference November 15, 2016.

New active substance median approval time for six regulatory authorities in Key messages The last decade, , saw a continuation.

Comparison of median approval time of NASs by year of submission vs

New active substances approved by EMA and FDA over 10 years

EMA: The European Medicines Agency

Comparing the registration to reimbursement pathway for new active substances in Europe Germany Poland To help provide a better understanding of the European.

Type and impact of HTA-related scientific advice given during development The variability in HTA organisations and methodologies that are utilised in HTA.

“Metro Map” analysis of FDA facilitated regulatory pathways and their influence on median approval times The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has.

Common facilitating practices in facilitated regulatory pathways*

Victoria Gemmell1 Professor Alex Mullen2

The Commonwealth Fund 2014 International Health Policy Survey of Older Adults in Eleven Countries EMBARGOED UNTIL 4:00 P.M. ET, NOV. 19, 2014 Robin Osborn.

Dr Jackie Hyland MBChB, MD, MFPHM, MBA

Rollout time breakdown: 24 common NASs in 7 jurisdictions

INTERNATIONALISATION – FOCUS ON EMA AND FDA

Regulatory and Reimbursement Harmonization

Regional regulatory initiatives use different approaches

Median, Box : 25th and 75th percentiles

Assessment routes and timelines in Australia (2011)

Comparison of median approval time of NASs by year of submission vs

Are agencies interested in adaptive licensing?

Out of the 52 NASs approved by all six authorities during :

Median times to submission and licensing for 70 new active substances approved in five markets from 1997 to 2010 Note: EMA approval.

HIV infections newly diagnosed in injecting drug users and men who have sex with men, by country, and year of report, 2002– Injecting drug users.

2019 CIRS survey: Methodologies to improve decision-making documentation during medicines development and review – gap analysis Do you think your current.

Process mapping of registration to reimbursement for new pharmaceuticals in UK Description: A systematic methodology was developed in order to create the.

Assessment routes and timelines

Presentation transcript:

Median Box : 25th and 75th percentiles Medicines designated for an expedited review pathway show a reduced time from regulatory approval to first HTA recommendation: 2014-2016 Median Box : 25th and 75th percentiles Canada France Germany Scotland Sweden In an effort to speed the assessment of new medicines while maintaining the quality of the regulatory review, facilitated regulatory pathways (FRPs) have been introduced in many countries. In this study, the effects of FRPs (expedited and conditional reviews) were investigated in terms of their influence on timing. First health technology assessment (HTA) recommendations issued between 2014 and 2016 were collected from the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technology in Health (CADTH), Haute Autorité de santé (HAS; France), Institut für Qualität und Wirtschaftlichkeit im Gesundheitswesen (IQWIG; Germany), Scottish Medicine Consortium (SMC) and Tandvårds-och läkemedelsförmånsverket (TLV; Sweden) for 90 internationalised medicines (new active substances approved between 2012 and 2016 by all five regulatory agencies). Of this cohort of internationalised medicines that received a HTA recommendation, 31% in Canada and 28% in Europe were approved via a FRP. With the exception of Scotland, expedited medicines were more likely to be appraised within a year from regulatory approval and had a shorter median time between regulatory approval to HTA recommendation than standard medicines. The largest difference was seen in Sweden, where medicines undergoing expedited regulatory review received a first HTA recommendation 66.5 days faster than those using standard pathways. Medicines designated for an expedited review pathway show a reduced time from regulatory approval to first HTA recommendation. Although this finding suggests an alignment between regulators and health technology assessors regarding the identification of medicines for which there is a need to expedite HTA recommendation, it cannot be assessed from these data whether the reduced time from approval to HTA recommendation is attributed to the sponsoring company strategy, HTA review time or both and further investigation would be required.