var _paq = window._paq = window._paq || []; /* tracker methods like "setCustomDimension" should be called before "trackPageView" */ _paq.push(['trackPageView']); _paq.push(['enableLinkTracking']); (function() { var u="https://rwrregs.matomo.cloud/"; _paq.push(['setTrackerUrl', u+'matomo.php']); _paq.push(['setSiteId', '1']); var d=document, g=d.createElement('script'), s=d.getElementsByTagName('script')[0]; g.async=true; g.data-privacy-src='//cdn.matomo.cloud/rwrregs.matomo.cloud/matomo.js'; s.parentNode.insertBefore(g,s); })();

Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – How RWE is Being Used to Support the Treatment of Cancer

RWE 101 – How RWE is Being Used to Support the Treatment of Cancer

Real-world evidence (RWE) enhances cancer treatment through providing more comprehensive and personalized patient data. Here are summarized examples:

[1] Targeted Therapies for Lung Cancer: RWE aids in identifying actionable mutations in non-small-cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC), facilitating targeted treatments.
[2] Immuno-Oncology Treatments: Through studying melanoma patient responses to immune checkpoint inhibitors, RWE informs long-term safety, efficacy (effectiveness), and optimal usage.
[3] Treatment Adherence and Persistence: RWE helps determine factors affecting adherence to oral chemotherapies, enabling effective patient management.
[4] Clinical Trial Design: Real-world data can ensure clinical trial populations better reflect the real-world population’s diversity, increasing the trials’ relevance.
[5] Post-Market Surveillance: RWE allows monitoring of approved cancer drugs’ safety and effectiveness, identifying previously unknown adverse effects and comparing different treatments.
[6] Comparative Effectiveness Research: RWE can evaluate the benefits and harms of different treatments, such as drug classes or treatment methods, enhancing decision-making.
[7] Pediatric Oncology: RWE offers valuable insights into pediatric cancer treatment patterns and outcomes, critical given the ethical concerns with trials in pediatric populations.
[8] Health Economics and Outcomes Research: RWE assesses the cost-effectiveness of cancer treatments, informing coverage and reimbursement decisions.
[9] Precision Medicine: Real-world genomic data, combined with clinical outcomes, helps create more personalized treatment strategies, like using PARP inhibitors for BRCA-mutated ovarian cancer.
[10] Population Health Management: RWE can expose disparities in cancer care, prompting efforts to address these gaps.

In summary, RWE significantly contributes to cancer treatment. It complements clinical trials, supports personalized care, highlights patient voice, and improves overall cancer care quality. Despite data standardization and quality challenges, RWE’s potential to enhance cancer treatment remains vast.

Share this story...

Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – How RWE is Being Used to Support the Treatment of Cancer2023-08-07T15:57:12+00:00

Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – Benefits of RWE in the Context of Rare Diseases

RWE 101 – Benefits of RWE in the Context of Rare Diseases

 

Real-world evidence (RWE) refers to information on health care that comes from real-world settings, such as electronic health records (EHRs), insurance claims, product and disease registries, patient-generated data, and emerging sources like wearables and social media.

RWE is becoming increasingly important in the management of rare diseases like Addison’s disease, which is characterized by insufficient hormone production from the adrenal glands. Here are some benefits RWE can provide:

[1] Improved Understanding of Natural Disease Progression: Due to the low prevalence of rare diseases, our understanding of them often lacks detail. Real-world data can help fill these knowledge gaps by offering insights into the disease’s natural history and progression.

[2] Efficacy and Safety of Treatments: Clinical trials are the gold standard for assessing the efficacy and safety of new treatments, but they may not represent the broader patient population due to their strict inclusion and exclusion criteria. RWE, being derived from a diverse population, can provide insight into how a treatment works in a broader range of patients.

[3] Patient-focused Drug Development: With RWE, researchers can understand the burden of disease and the benefits patients value most, which can guide patient-focused drug development.

[4] Health Economics and Outcomes Research (HEOR): RWE can provide critical data for health economic evaluations, cost-effectiveness studies, and budget impact analyses.

[5] Early Identification and Diagnosis: Since many rare diseases often go undiagnosed due to their rarity and a lack of awareness among healthcare providers, RWE can help in early identification and diagnosis by revealing patterns or correlations that might not be apparent in smaller datasets.

[6] Post-marketing Surveillance: After a drug has been approved, RWE can be used to monitor its long-term effectiveness and side effects in a larger population.

[7] Guiding Clinical Practice: By understanding how treatments work in the real world, doctors can be better informed about the likely benefits and risks for individual patients, thus guiding personalized treatment.

However, it’s important to note that while RWE provides numerous benefits, it also comes with challenges, including data quality and integrity, privacy and security concerns, and the need for sophisticated analytical methods to derive meaningful conclusions from complex and heterogenous datasets.

Share this story...

Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – Benefits of RWE in the Context of Rare Diseases2023-08-07T14:32:56+00:00

Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – Disease Prevalence vs Incidence

RWE 101 – Disease Prevalence vs Incidence

Real-world evidence (RWE), derived from real-world data (RWD), allows us to gain insights into disease prevalence and incidence outside of controlled clinical trial settings. This information plays a crucial role in shaping healthcare policies, identifying healthcare needs, directing research efforts, and improving patient care.

Disease prevalence refers to the total number of individuals in a population who have a specific disease at a given time. This includes both new (incidence) and pre-existing cases. RWE can offer a more comprehensive picture of disease prevalence by incorporating data from various sources such as electronic health records (EHRs), insurance claims data, patient registries, and more. This data is especially valuable in understanding chronic diseases, such as diabetes or heart disease, where prevalence data can reveal the burden of disease in a population, help to identify risk factors, and guide resource allocation.

Disease incidence, on the other hand, refers to the number of new cases of a disease that develop in a specific time period. Incidence data is particularly valuable in understanding infectious diseases or diseases linked to specific exposure or risk factors, like cancer or HIV/AIDS. Incidence data derived from RWD can help track disease outbreaks, identify populations at risk, and assess the effectiveness of preventative measures.

For example, using EHRs and public health databases, RWE can offer insights into the incidence of a new disease like COVID-19, track its spread, and monitor the effectiveness of public health measures in real-time.
RWE also plays a critical role in post-market surveillance of drugs and medical devices. By monitoring incidence rates of adverse events in the general population, it is possible to detect safety issues that may not have appeared during clinical trials, due to their limited size or exclusion of certain patient groups.

However, there are potential limitations to RWE including data quality, missing data, and bias in data collection. These factors should be considered while interpreting RWE for disease prevalence and incidence.

In conclusion, RWE provides a comprehensive and real-time view of disease prevalence and incidence in real-world settings, thereby informing health policy decisions, guiding research, and improving overall patient care.

Share this story...

Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – Disease Prevalence vs Incidence2023-08-07T14:27:06+00:00

Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – ‘Interventional’ Clinical Trial vs Non-Interventional Study

RWE 101 – ‘Interventional’ Clinical Trial vs Non-Interventional Study

Interventional Clinical Trial: In this type of study, researchers actively intervene by assigning participants to different groups, administering specific treatments, or manipulating variables. The primary objective is to assess the safety and efficacy of new interventions e.g., drug or medical device.
 
Key characteristics of interventional clinical trials include:
 
Randomization: Participants are randomly assigned to different groups, such as the experimental group receiving the intervention and the control group receiving a placebo or standard treatment.

Intervention: Researchers actively administer a specific treatment or intervention to the participants.

Control Group: There is often a control group that receives a placebo or standard treatment for comparison.

Primary Outcomes: Trials are designed to measure predefined primary outcomes, such as improvements in health outcomes, survival rates, or reduction in symptoms.

Regulatory Oversight: Interventional trials require regulatory approval and are usually subject to stricter (risk-proportionate) regulations than non-interventional studies.
 
Non-interventional Study: These studies focus on collecting data without any active healthcare or treatment intervention imposed by the researchers. Researchers observe and collect information from participants in their natural settings (real world settings) or through retrospective analysis of existing data (secondary use of existing data).
 
Key characteristics of non-interventional studies include:
 
Observation: Researchers observe participants and collect data without actively intervening in the healthcare management of the participant or administering any specific treatment (treatment intervention).

Natural Setting: Data is collected in the real-world clinical practice or from existing databases, medical records, surveys, or interviews.

Descriptive Analysis: Non-interventional studies often aim to describe and analyze associations, relationships, patterns, or risk factors in the population under study.

Retrospective or Prospective: Data can be collected retrospectively by analyzing past records or prospectively by following participants over time.

No Randomization: Participants are not randomly assigned to groups, and treatment decisions are made by healthcare providers according to routine clinical practice.

Regulatory Oversight: Every country regulates non-interventional studies differently. The regulatory burden can therefore be much higher than expected.
 
Both ‘interventional’ clinical trials and non-interventional studies play important roles in advancing medical knowledge. Interventional trials provide more rigorous evidence for evaluating new interventions, while non-interventional studies offer insights into real-world effectiveness, population health, and long-term outcomes.

Share this story...

Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – ‘Interventional’ Clinical Trial vs Non-Interventional Study2023-08-07T12:55:06+00:00

Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – Are the terms ‘clinical study’ and ‘clinical trial’ synonymous in the context of non-interventional studies?

RWE 101 – Are the terms ‘clinical study’ and ‘clinical trial’ synonymous in the context of non-interventional studies?

No, “clinical study” and “clinical trial” are not necessarily synonymous in the context of non-interventional studies in the EU.

In general, a clinical study refers to any investigation involving human participants that is intended to discover or verify the clinical, pharmacological or other pharmacodynamic effects of one or more medicinal products, or to identify any adverse reactions to one or more medicinal products. This can include both (interventional) clinical trials and non-interventional studies.

A clinical trial, on the other hand, specifically refers to a type of interventional clinical study where one or more medicinal products are tested in human participants with the aim of evaluating their safety and/or efficacy i.e., there is a treatment intervention involving a medicinal product.

Non-interventional studies (NIS) are observational studies that do not involve any treatment interventions or protocol-dictated administration of a medicinal product. They are designed to observe patients in their natural clinical setting and collect data on the outcomes of a specific drug or treatment intervention.

So, while a clinical trial is a type of clinical study, not all clinical studies are clinical trials.
 
Revision 2 of ICH GCP caused confusion to those of us who work with non-interventional studies. The glossary claimed that a ‘clinical trial’ was synonymous with a ‘clinical study’ (Section 1.12 of ICH GCP(R2)). This works if you conduct clinical trials (they are a type of clinical study), but not if you conduct non-interventional studies, which are a type of ‘clinical study other than a clinical trial’ (Article 2.2(4) of Regulation EU/536/2014).
 
The (draft) Revision 3 of ICH GCP includes a new definition of ‘clinical trial’ provided in the Glossary, which removes any confusion regarding clinical trial vs clinical study.

Clinical Trial = Any interventional investigation in human participants intended to discover or verify the clinical, pharmacological and/or other pharmacodynamic effects of an investigational product(s); and/or to identify any adverse reactions to an investigational product(s); and/or to study absorption, distribution, metabolism and excretion of an investigational product(s) with the object of ascertaining its safety and/or efficacy.

Share this story...

Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – Are the terms ‘clinical study’ and ‘clinical trial’ synonymous in the context of non-interventional studies?2023-08-07T12:48:43+00:00

Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – Regulatory Compliance

RWE 101 – Regulatory Compliance

Regulatory compliance in the context of real-world evidence (RWE) refers to ensuring that the generation and use of RWE for regulatory purposes are in accordance with applicable laws, regulations, and guidelines. RWE is increasingly being used to support regulatory decision-making in healthcare, particularly in the evaluation of the safety and effectiveness of medical products.

To ensure regulatory compliance when using RWE, organizations must follow the regulatory requirements and guidelines set forth by regulatory agencies such as the FDA in the United States, the EMA in the European Union, and other national regulatory bodies. These requirements and guidelines include criteria for the selection and use of RWE sources, study design, data quality, data privacy, and transparency.

For example, the FDA has published guidance on the use of RWE in regulatory decision-making, which outlines the criteria for using RWE to support the approval of new indications for existing drugs and to satisfy post-marketing study requirements. The guidance stresses the importance of ensuring that RWE studies are designed to address the regulatory question at hand, have appropriate data quality, and include appropriate statistical analyses.

In addition, regulatory compliance in the context of RWE also requires organizations to adhere to ethical standards for the protection of human subjects and patient privacy. Organizations must ensure that RWE studies are conducted in accordance with ethical principles, and that the data collected and analyzed are anonymized, pseudoanonymised, or de-identified to protect patient privacy.

Overall, regulatory compliance in the context of RWE requires organizations to carefully follow regulatory requirements and guidelines to ensure that the RWE generated and used for regulatory purposes is of high quality, meets ethical standards, and meets the regulatory agency’s criteria for acceptability.

Share this story...

Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – Regulatory Compliance2023-08-07T12:34:31+00:00

Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – Regulatory Intelligence

RWE 101 – Regulatory Intelligence

In the context of real-world evidence (RWE) and real-world research (RWR), regulatory intelligence refers to the process of gathering, analyzing, and interpreting regulatory information from various sources to support compliance with regulatory requirements and inform decision-making.

Regulatory intelligence can help stakeholders in the healthcare industry, such as pharmaceutical companies, medical device manufacturers, and healthcare providers, to understand and navigate the complex and ever-changing regulatory landscape. It involves tracking and analyzing regulatory developments, including new and updated regulations, guidance documents, and policies, as well as monitoring regulatory enforcement actions, such as warning letters and product recalls.

By staying up-to-date with regulatory requirements and trends, stakeholders can better assess the potential regulatory implications of RWE and RWR studies, ensure compliance with relevant regulations, and make informed decisions about product development, clinical trials, and post-market surveillance.

In short…regulatory intelligence is a critical component of RWE and RWR that helps ensure that stakeholders are aware of and able to comply with regulatory requirements in their respective fields.

Share this story...

Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – Regulatory Intelligence2023-08-07T12:28:28+00:00

Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – Regulatory Science

RWE 101 – Regulatory Science

Regulatory science is a field of study that involves the application of scientific methods, principles, and data to the development and evaluation of regulatory policies, standards, and practices. In the context of real-world evidence (RWE), regulatory science plays an important role in evaluating the safety, efficacy (effectiveness), and quality of healthcare products and in developing evidence-based regulatory decisions.

Regulatory science in the context of RWE focuses on the use of RWE to support regulatory decision-making. This involves evaluating the quality and relevance of RWE for specific regulatory purposes, such as assessing the effectiveness of a new drug or medical device in a real-world setting. Regulatory science also involves developing and refining methodologies for generating and analyzing RWE, such as observational studies or real-world randomized controlled trials (e.g., pragmatic clinical trials, cluster randomized trials etc).

The use of RWE in regulatory decision-making is becoming increasingly important as stakeholders seek to better understand the real-world performance of healthcare products and as regulators seek to make more informed decisions based on the best available evidence. Regulatory science provides a framework for evaluating the quality and relevance of RWE and for ensuring that it is used appropriately in regulatory decision-making.

In summary, regulatory science in the context of RWE is a field of study that focuses on the use of scientific methods and data to support regulatory decision-making. It involves evaluating the quality and relevance of RWE, developing and refining methodologies for generating and analyzing RWE, and ensuring that RWE is used appropriately in regulatory decision-making.

 

Share this story...

Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – Regulatory Science2023-08-07T12:19:12+00:00

Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – NICE Real World Evidence Framework

RWE 101 – NICE Real World Evidence Framework

The UK’s National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) has developed a Real World Evidence (RWE) Framework to help evaluate the effectiveness and value of healthcare interventions using real-world data.

The key points of the NICE RWE framework include:

[1] Definition of RWE: Real-world data (RWD) are data collected outside of clinical trials, from sources such as electronic health records, claims databases, and patient registries. RWE is the use of RWD to generate evidence on the effectiveness, safety, and value of healthcare interventions.

[2] Scope of RWE: The NICE RWE Framework focuses on using RWE to inform decisions about the effectiveness and value of healthcare interventions in the UK.

[3] Quality and reliability of RWE: NICE emphasizes the need for high-quality and reliable RWE, which should meet certain standards in terms of data completeness, accuracy, consistency, and validity.

[4] Applicability of RWE: NICE recommends that RWE should be used in combination with other types of evidence, such as randomized controlled trials, to ensure that it is applicable to the population of interest and that the findings are robust.

[5] Analysis and interpretation of RWE: The NICE RWE Framework provides guidance on how to analyze and interpret RWE, including methods for adjusting for confounding factors and biases.

[6] Transparency and reproducibility: NICE emphasizes the importance of transparency and reproducibility in RWE studies, which should be clearly documented and reported to enable independent validation and replication.

[6] Ethical considerations: NICE highlights the need for ethical considerations in RWE studies, including data privacy and security, informed consent, and protection of vulnerable populations.

Overall, the NICE RWE Framework provides a structured approach to using real-world data to inform healthcare decision-making, while ensuring that the data is of high quality and the studies are conducted ethically and transparently.

Share this story...

Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – NICE Real World Evidence Framework2023-08-07T12:13:03+00:00

Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – The Role of RWE in Health Technology Assessments (HTAs)

RWE 101 – The Role of RWE in Health Technology Assessments (HTAs)

Real-world evidence (RWE) is becoming increasingly important in the context of health technology assessment (HTA), which is the process of evaluating the clinical and economic impact of healthcare interventions. HTA is used to inform decisions about which treatments, technologies, and interventions should be funded and made available to patients.

RWE can play an important role in HTA by providing additional data on the safety, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness of healthcare interventions, beyond what is typically available from clinical trials. RWE can be generated from a variety of sources, including electronic health records, administrative claims data, patient registries, and other real-world data sources.

RWE can be used to supplement or replace data from clinical trials, particularly in situations where the clinical trial data is limited or may not fully reflect real-world conditions. For example, RWE can provide information on how interventions work in different patient populations, including those with comorbidities or other conditions that may not have been included in clinical trials.

In addition, RWE can provide valuable information on the long-term effectiveness and safety of interventions, as well as their impact on patient quality of life and other patient-centered outcomes. This information can be particularly important in assessing the value of interventions over the long term and in different patient populations.

Overall, RWE can play an important role in improving the quality and accuracy of HTA, by providing additional data and insights that can help to inform decisions about which healthcare interventions should be funded and made available to patients.

Share this story...

Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – The Role of RWE in Health Technology Assessments (HTAs)2023-08-07T12:06:50+00:00
Help

About Us

Contact Us

Our Values

SSO Login

Follow Us

Newsletter

LinkedIn

[…]

Legal Info

Privacy Policy

Terms and Conditions

Copyright 2026 | Real-World Research Limited | All Rights Reserved |

This website uses cookies and third party services. Settings
OK Reject

Cookies

We use analytical tools (Google Analytics) to help us improve the user experience. We DO NOT sell or use any of this data for any purpose beyond improving the design and usability of our own website (rwr-regs.com).
Go to Top