Drug regulatory agencies should ensure that the benefits of drugs outweigh their risks, but licensed medicines sometimes do not perform as expected in everyday clinical practice. Failure may relate to lower than anticipated efficacy or a higher than anticipated incidence or severity of adverse effects. Here we show that the problem of benefit-risk is to a considerable degree a problem of variability in drug response. We describe biological and behavioural sources of variability and how these contribute to the long-known efficacy-effectiveness gap. In this context, efficacy describes how a drug performs under conditions of clinical trials, whereas effectiveness describes how it performs under conditions of everyday clinical practice. We argue that a broad range of pre- and post-licensing technologies will need to be harnessed to bridge the efficacy-effectiveness gap. Successful approaches will not be limited to the current notion of pharmacogenomics-based personalized medicines, but will also entail the wider use of electronic health-care tools to improve drug prescribing and patient adherence.

The first formal qualification of safety biomarkers for regulatory decision making marks a milestone in the application of biomarkers to drug development. Following submission of drug toxicity studies and analyses of biomarker performance to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medicines Agency (EMEA) by the Predictive Safety Testing Consortium's (PSTC) Nephrotoxicity Working Group, seven renal safety biomarkers have been qualified for limited use in nonclinical and clinical drug development to help guide safety assessments. This was a pilot process, and the experience gained will both facilitate better understanding of how the qualification process will probably evolve and clarify the minimal requirements necessary to evaluate the performance of biomarkers of organ injury within specific contexts.

No abstract

The endothelial glycocalyx (EG), which covers the apical surface of the endothelial cells and floats into the lumen of the vessels, is a key player in vascular integrity and cardiovascular homeostasis. The EG is composed of PGs (proteoglycans), glycoproteins, glycolipids, and glycosaminoglycans, in particular hyaluronan (HA). HA seems to be implicated in most of the functions described for EG such as creating a space between blood and the endothelium, controlling vessel permeability, restricting leukocyte and platelet adhesion, and allowing an appropriate endothelial response to flow variation through mechanosensing. The amount of HA in the EG may be regulated by HYAL (hyaluronidase) 1, the most active somatic hyaluronidase. HYAL1 seems enriched in endothelial cells through endocytosis from the bloodstream. The role of the other main somatic hyaluronidase, HYAL2, in the EG is uncertain. Damage to the EG, accompanied by shedding of one or more of its components, is an early sign of various pathologies including diabetes mellitus. Shedding increases the blood or plasma concentration of several EG components, such as HA, heparan sulfate, and syndecan. The plasma levels of these molecules can then be used as sensitive markers of EG degradation. This has been shown in type 1 and type 2 diabetic patients. Recent experimental studies suggest that preserving the size and amount of EG HA in the face of diabetic insults could be a useful novel therapeutic strategy to slow diabetic complications. One way to achieve this goal, as suggested by a murine model of HYAL1 deficiency, may be to inhibit the function of HYAL1. The same approach may succeed in other pathological situations involving endothelial dysfunction and EG damage.

Drug regulatory agencies are increasingly pressed by the challenge of finding the appropriate balance between the need for rapid access to new drugs and the need to ensure comprehensive data on their benefits and risks. This dilemma is not new, but has been made more prominent by recent high-profile drug withdrawals and conflicting demands, including the need to improve the efficiency of drug development on one hand, and the need to avoid exposing patients to unnecessary risks or possibly ineffective treatments on the other. Here, we summarize the current demands by stakeholders and the scientific and regulatory issues at stake, describe existing and emerging regulatory approaches, and speculate on future directions, such as evolution of the current regulatory model from a one-off marketing authorization to a life-cycle approach.