IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/patien/v17y2024i2d10.1007_s40271-023-00653-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Current Practices and Challenges When Submitting Patient Experience Data for Regulatory Decisions by the US Food and Drug Administration: An Industry Survey

Author

Listed:
  • Cathy Anne Pinto

    (Merck & Co., Inc.)

  • Tommi Tervonen

    (Kielo Research)

  • Cecilia Jimenez-Moreno

    (Evidera)

  • Bennett Levitan

    (Janssen Research and Development, LLC)

  • Montse Soriano Gabarró

    (Bayer AG)

  • Cynthia Girman

    (CERObs Consulting, LLC)

  • Josephine M. Norquist

    (Merck & Co., Inc.)

  • Brett Hauber

    (Pfizer
    University of Washington School of Pharmacy)

Abstract

Objectives To understand industry practices and challenges when submitting patient experience data (PED) for regulatory decisions by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Methods A two-part online survey related to collection, submission, and use of PED by FDA in regulatory decision-making (part 1) and a best-worst exercise for prioritizing potential PED initiatives (part 2) was completed by industry and contract research organization (CRO) members with ≥ 2 years of recent experience with patient-reported outcome (PRO), natural history study (NHS), or patient preference (PP) data; and direct experience with FDA filings including PED. Results A total of 50 eligible respondents (84% industry) completed part 1 of the survey, among which 46 completed part 2. Respondents mostly had PRO (86%) and PP (50%) experience. All indicated that FDA meetings should have a standing agenda item to discuss PED. Most (78%) reported meetings should occur before pivotal trials. A common challenge was justifying inclusion without knowing if and how data will be used. Most agreed that FDA and industry should co-develop the PED table in the FDA clinical review (74%), and the table should report reason(s) for not using PED (96%) in regulatory decision-making. Most important efforts to advance PED use in decision-making were a dedicated meeting pathway and expanded FDA guidance (51% each). Conclusions FDA has policy targets expanding PED use, but challenges remain regarding pathways for PED submission and transparency in regulatory decision-making. Alignment on the use of existing meeting opportunities to discuss PED, co-development of the PED table, and expanded guidance are encouraged.

Suggested Citation

  • Cathy Anne Pinto & Tommi Tervonen & Cecilia Jimenez-Moreno & Bennett Levitan & Montse Soriano Gabarró & Cynthia Girman & Josephine M. Norquist & Brett Hauber, 2024. "Current Practices and Challenges When Submitting Patient Experience Data for Regulatory Decisions by the US Food and Drug Administration: An Industry Survey," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 17(2), pages 147-159, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:patien:v:17:y:2024:i:2:d:10.1007_s40271-023-00653-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s40271-023-00653-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40271-023-00653-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40271-023-00653-8?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:patien:v:17:y:2024:i:2:d:10.1007_s40271-023-00653-8. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.