Integration of PKPD relationships into benefit–risk analysis

Abstract

Aim Despite the continuous endeavour to achieve high standards in medical care through effectiveness measures, a quantitative framework for the assessment of the benefit–risk balance of new medicines is lacking prior to regulatory approval. The aim of this short review is to summarise the approaches currently available for benefit–risk assessment. In addition, we propose the use of pharmacokinetic–pharmacodynamic (PKPD) modelling as the pharmacological basis for evidence synthesis and evaluation of novel therapeutic agents. Methods A comprehensive literature search has been performed using MESH terms in PubMed, in which articles describing benefit–risk assessment and modelling and simulation were identified. In parallel, a critical review of multi‐criteria decision analysis (MCDA) is presented as a tool for characterising a drug's safety and efficacy profile. Results A definition of benefits and risks has been proposed by the European Medicines Agency (EMA), in which qualitative and quantitative elements are included. However, in spite of the value of MCDA as a quantitative method, decisions about benefit–risk balance continue to rely on subjective expert opinion. By contrast, a model‐informed approach offers the opportunity for a more comprehensive evaluation of benefit–risk balance before extensive evidence is generated in clinical practice. Conclusions Benefit–risk balance should be an integral part of the risk management plan and as such considered before marketing authorisation. Modelling and simulation can be incorporated into MCDA to support the evidence synthesis as well evidence generation taking into account the underlying correlations between favourable and unfavourable effects. In addition, it represents a valuable tool for the optimization of protocol design in effectiveness trials.

How to optimise drug study design: pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics studies introduced to paediatricians

“…This ‘data‐rich’ approach has severe limitations in paediatric practice for both ethical and practical reasons: the fixed sampling strategy potentially interferes with patient care; and the requirement for multiple blood samples (perhaps 12–15) raises concerns about venous access and blood loss. Population PK (using sparse sampling schemes in which less blood samples are taken per individual without the need for a rigid sampling time as compared to classical PK studies) and PKPD modelling (using statistical models to characterise the exposure–response relationship of a drug) are now well established . This approach prevents children being exposed to the practice of large numbers and volumes of blood sampling seen in adult PK and PKPD studies.…”

A General Framework for Assessing In vitro/In vivo Correlation as a Tool for Maximizing the Benefit‐Risk Ratio of a Treatment Using a Convolution‐Based Modeling Approach

“…Structured approaches have been proposed to formally address benefit‐risk given the multidimensional nature of the data required for this assessment . More recently, quantitative approaches based on modeling and simulation were also proposed to formally assess the benefit‐risk ratio …”

Beyond the Randomized Clinical Trial: Innovative Data Science to Close the Pediatric Evidence Gap

“…In cases where dedicated pediatric trials are not feasible, modeling and simulation workflows used in pharmacometrics might be used to assess the likely clinical benefit-risk ratio of decision support tools by integrating available data from adult and pediatric patients. 69 Implementation of medical decision support tools Implementation of findings from machine-learning studies into pediatric clinical practice will not happen without focused efforts and close involvement of the various stakeholders. Currently, the widespread clinical implementation of scientific evidence is a lengthy process (> 15 years on average) and only achieved in about half of the cases.…”