Drug developers, healthcare providers, insurance companies, and others involved in the delivery of healthcare in the United States are uncertain about the benefits of a risk evaluation program introduced three years ago by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), according to the Tufts Center for the Study of Drug Development.
Key findings of Tufts CSDD’s assessment of the Risk Evaluation & Mitigation Strategy (REMS) program, the first systematic look at the initiative since the FDA introduced it in 2008, were reported in the January/February Tufts CSDD Impact Report, released today.
"A majority of the organizations told us they felt the REMS program needs a major overhaul, and said that a REMS is a poor substitute for other improvements needed system-wide in drug education, communication, use monitoring, patient access, and delivery of care," said Christopher-Paul Milne, associate director at Tufts CSDD, who conducted the assessment.
Drug developers must create a REMS as part of a new product approval application, and sometimes for a previously approved product, when the FDA determines that such a strategy is necessary to ensure that the benefits of the drug outweigh the risks.
According to Milne, "Most respondents said it is virtually impossible to measure the benefits of a REMS, compared to its burdens on patient access and cost of health care delivery, for a newly approved drug, and that even for an already-approved drug, it would likely require two years or more to effectively conduct such an assessment."
Among other findings developed by the survey were the following:
Milne noted that the REMS program will likely impact a growing number of healthcare stakeholders as the number of products with REMS expands in coming years.
Driving Diversity with the Integrated Research Model
October 16th 2024Ashley Moultrie, CCRP, senior director, DEI & community engagement, Javara discusses current trends and challenges with achieving greater diversity in clinical trials, how integrated research organizations are bringing care directly to patients, and more.
AI in Clinical Trials: A Long, But Promising Road Ahead
May 29th 2024Stephen Pyke, chief clinical data and digital officer, Parexel, discusses how AI can be used in clinical trials to streamline operational processes, the importance of collaboration and data sharing in advancing the use of technology, and more.
The Rise of Predictive Engagement Tools in Clinical Trials
November 22nd 2024Patient attrition can be a significant barrier to the success of a randomized controlled trial (RCT). Today, with the help of AI-powered predictive engagement tools, clinical study managers are finding ways to proactively reduce attrition rates in RCTs, and increase the effectiveness of their trial. In this guide, we look at the role AI-powered patient engagement tools play in clinical research, from the problems they’re being used to solve to the areas and indications in which they’re being deployed.