Cookie policy: This site uses cookies (small files stored on your computer) to simplify and improve your experience of this website. Cookies are small text files stored on the device you are using to access this website. For more information please take a look at our terms and conditions. Some parts of the site may not work properly if you choose not to accept cookies.

Join

Subscribe or Register

Existing user? Login

sections

Evidence-based medicine

Evidence base for medicines over-reliant on expensive randomised controlled trials, says MHRA chair

UK regulator says its commonplace for a clinical trial to cost US$100m, which can contribute to high drug costs.

It is commonplace now for a clinical trial to cost $100m which can contribute to the high drugs costs, says Michael Rawlins, the chair of the UK’s MHRA during the International Pharmaceutical Federation World Congress 2015

Source: FIP

Michael Rawlins, chair of the UK’s MHRA, says if countries are having to spend millions on trials then the cost of drugs is going to be unaffordable

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have weaknesses and alternative trial designs should be considered more prominently in forming the evidence base for interventions, says Sir Michael Rawlins, chair of the UK’s Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).

Novel trial designs should be considered as alternatives to “outrageously expensive” and sometimes flawed trials for assessing the safety and efficacy of medicines, he told the International Pharmaceutical Federation (FIP) World Congress 2015 in Dusseldorf, Germany, on 30 September 2015.

“It is commonplace now for a RCT to cost US$100m and there are a fair number of trials going on in the EU now that cost US$500m to do,” says Rawlins. “It’s hopeless, because the problem is if a country is having to spend this amount of money on these trials, then the price and the cost of the drug is going to be unaffordable in many healthcare systems.”

Rawlins said RCTs had become the gold standard within “hierarchies of evidence” used by technology assessment agencies, with observational studies much further down the list, but they were not perfect and other designs and analyses should be considered.

He also argued that it was important to retain clinical judgement in treatment decisions and not simply rely on the evidence base.

While RCTs minimise bias, confounding and random error, they also have weaknesses, he said. “There are statistical issues. We are bedevilled by the null hypothesis,” he said and explained that even a slender effect size will be statistically significant in a large enough trial.

In addition, RCTs are often not generalisable, as participants often have only one condition whereas real-world patients have several conditions.

Rawlins pointed to several other types of trials, including basket, umbrella, Mendelian randomisation, step-wedge and ring trials as alternatives to traditional designs. Historical controlled trials – comparing a cohort treated with a novel intervention with a historical cohort – may also be useful in some circumstances.

He also discussed the rise of adaptive pathways for drug approval. Here, once a potential new drug undergoes an experimental phase to examine the effect size and gets initial approval, access is extended to a large cohort of real-world patients in which the effect and safety data are collected and analysed in an observational phase. Only then does a drug acquire a full licence.

“A number of pilots are going on within the EU looking at whether this design is going to work,” he said.

Citation: The Pharmaceutical Journal DOI: 10.1211/PJ.2015.20069465

Have your say

For commenting, please login or register as a user and agree to our Community Guidelines. You will be re-directed back to this page where you will have the ability to comment.

Recommended from Pharmaceutical Press

  • Print
  • Share
  • Comment
  • Save
  • Print Friendly Version of this pagePrint Get a PDF version of this webpagePDF

Supplementary images

  • It is commonplace now for a clinical trial to cost $100m which can contribute to the high drugs costs, says Michael Rawlins, the chair of the UK’s MHRA during the International Pharmaceutical Federation World Congress 2015

Jobs you might like

Newsletter Sign-up

Want to keep up with the latest news, comment and CPD articles in pharmacy and science? Subscribe to our free alerts.