Evidence gaps for drugs and medical devices at market entry in Europe and potential solutions
Authors: Hulstaert Frank , Pouppez Céline , Primus-de Jong Célia , Harkin Kathleen , Neyt Mattias 
Published: January 2025

SCIENTIFIC REPORT 13 -- 1 INTRODUCTION, AIMS AND SCOPE OF THIS REPORT 13 -- 1.1 BACKGROUND 13 -- 1.2 THE REGULATORY SYSTEM OF MEDICINAL PRODUCTS AND MEDICAL DEVICES 17 -- 1.3 HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT AND COVERAGE OF HEALTHCARE 17 -- 1.4 NEW EU REGULATIONS FOR MEDICAL DEVICES AND PHARMACEUTICALS 19 -- 1.5 AIMS AND SCOPE OF THIS PROJECT 20 -- 2 METHODS 22 -- 3 LEGAL AND ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS 23 -- 3.1 INTRODUCTION: THE LEGAL AND ETHICAL FRAMEWORKS ON EVIDENCE REQUIREMENTS 23 -- 3.2 METHODOLOGY 24 -- 3.3 APPLICABLE RULES 25 -- 3.4 EVIDENTIARY REQUIREMENTS FOR MEDICINAL PRODUCTS AND MEDICAL DEVICES 28 -- 3.4.1 Ethical rules for the conduct of clinical trials 28 -- 3.4.2 Research and human rights 32 -- 3.4.3 Evidentiary requirements in the marketing authorisation process for medicines 33 -- 3.4.4 Evidentiary requirements in the CE-marking process for high-risk medical devices 47 -- 3.4.5 The role of ethics committees in reviewing the evidence and the Belgian situation 61 -- 3.5 TRANSPARENCY REQUIREMENTS FOR CLINICAL DATA 64 -- 3.5.1 Ethical rules regarding the transparency on clinical trials data 64 -- 3.5.2 Transparency requirements in the regulatory framework for medicines 65 -- 3.5.3 Transparency requirements for Medical devices 69 -- 3.5.4 Transparency of national reimbursement decisions 73 -- 3.5.5 Enforcement and penalties 73 -- 3.6 CONCLUSION / DISCUSSION REGARDING LEGAL FRAMEWORK 75 -- 4 ANALYSIS OF RIZIV-INAMI DOSSIERS 76 -- 4.1 METHODS 76 -- 4.2 FINDINGS 77 -- 4.2.1 Applications for reimbursement of 18 medicinal products 77 -- 4.2.2 Applications for reimbursement of 18 medical devices 81 -- 5 LITERATURE REVIEW 85 -- 5.1 METHODS 85 -- 5.1.1 Search strategy 85 -- 5.1.2 Selection procedure 86 -- 5.1.3 Selection criteria 87 -- 5.2 OVERVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ON MEDICINAL PRODUCTS 87 -- 5.2.1 Introduction 87 -- 5.2.2 Evidence gaps at market entry (and in the post-market period) 93 -- 5.2.3 Evidence gaps and reimbursement decisions 97 -- 5.2.4 Need for more collaboration (e.g. between regulators and HTA bodies) 98 -- 5.2.5 Use of surrogate endpoints 101 -- 5.2.6 Early patient access, conditional marketing authorisation and managed entry agreements 103 -- 5.3 OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE ON MEDICAL DEVICES 105 -- 5.3.1 Introduction 105 -- 5.3.2 The selected publications 109 -- 5.3.3 Recurring issues in the articles: 115 -- 6 DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS 117 -- 6.1 THE TENSION BETWEEN BUSINESS PRIORITIES AND PATIENT BENEFIT 117 -- 6.1.1 The healthcare economy, important but not the scope of this project 117 -- 6.1.2 Hard law or ethical rules to manage business priorities versus patient benefit? 118 -- 6.1.3 The assessment of true innovation requires a direct comparison of patient benefit 119 -- 6.1.4 Horizon scanning and current limitations affecting the impact of early dialogue and common scientific advice 120 -- 6.1.5 The failed promise of post-marketing trials, coverage with evidence development and managed entry agreements 120 -- 6.2 TOWARDS A CLINICAL DEVELOPMENT PATHWAY THAT BETTER MEETS THE DEMANDS OF REGULATORS AND HTA BODIES 124 -- 6.2.1 The need for a better collaboration between regulators and HTA bodies 124 -- 6.2.2 The split between regulators and HTA bodies, an example of inefficient governance? 125 -- 6.3 EVIDENCE GAPS GROUPED ACCORDING TO THE PICOTS FRAMEWORK 125 -- 6.3.1 Population: keep the randomization but include the routine care patients, all evidence in patient subpopulations should be detailed 126 -- 6.3.2 Intervention: knowledge of optimal dose and duration is key, routine care to be reflected as much as possible 126 -- 6.3.3 The (active) comparator: the Helsinki declaration and the EMA 126 -- 6.3.4 Outcomes: focus on patient-relevant outcomes instead of surrogates that are not validated 128 -- 6.3.5 Study design and time periods, the opportunities and risks of relying only on observational real-world data 129 -- 6.3.6 Should the evidence bar be lower for medical devices? 133 -- 6.4 ON TRANSPARENCY AND REPORTING 135 -- 6.4.1 The case of medicinal products 135 -- 6.4.2 The case of medical devices 135 -- 6.5 PUBLISHED POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS 136 -- 7 RECOMMENDATIONS 139 -- 7.1 FOR THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION AND MEMBER STATES GOVERNMENTS 139 -- 7.2 FOR MEDICAL AND SURGICAL SCIENTIFIC SOCIETIES 140 -- 7.3 FOR (HIGH-RISK) MEDICAL DEVICE INDUSTRY 140 -- 7.4 FOR ALL ETHICS COMMITTEES IN BELGIUM AND ABROAD 141 -- 7.5 FOR ALL CONSUMER ORGANISATIONS AND PATIENT ORGANISATIONS 141 -- 7.6 TO RIZIV-INAMI, HTA AGENCIES AND PAYERS 141 -- 7.7 TO RIZIV-INAMI, INTERNATIONAL HTA AGENCIES, AND JOURNAL EDITORS 141 -- APPENDICES 142