Skip to main content
Journal cover image

How Much Evidence Is Enough? Research Sponsor Experiences Seeking Regulatory Acceptance of Digital Health Technology-Derived Endpoints.

Publication ,  Journal Article
Perry, B; Kehoe, L; Swezey, T; Le Masne, Q; Goldhahn, J; Staley, A; Corneli, A
Published in: Digit Biomark
2023

INTRODUCTION: Digital health technologies (DHTs) provide opportunities for real-time data collection and assessment of patient function. However, use of DHT-derived endpoints in clinical trials to support medical product labelling claims is limited. METHODS: From November 2020 through March 2021, the Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative (CTTI) conducted a qualitative descriptive study using semi-structured interviews with sponsors of clinical trials that used DHT-derived endpoints. We aimed to learn about their experiences, including their interactions with regulators and the challenges they encountered. Using applied thematic analysis, we identified barriers to and recommendations for using DHT-derived endpoints in pivotal trials. RESULTS: Sponsors identified five key challenges to incorporating DHT-derived endpoints in clinical trials. These included (1) a need for additional regulatory clarity specific to DHT-derived endpoints, (2) the official clinical outcome assessment qualification process being impractical for the biopharmaceutical industry, (3) a lack of comparator clinical endpoints, (4) a lack of validated DHTs and algorithms for concepts of interest, and (5) a lack of operational support from DHT vendors. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: CTTI shared the interview findings with the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and during a multi-stakeholder expert meeting. Based on these discussions, we provide several new and revised tools to aid sponsors in using DHT-derived endpoints in pivotal trials to support labelling claims.

Duke Scholars

Published In

Digit Biomark

DOI

EISSN

2504-110X

Publication Date

2023

Volume

7

Issue

1

Start / End Page

45 / 53

Location

Switzerland
 

Citation

APA
Chicago
ICMJE
MLA
NLM
Perry, B., Kehoe, L., Swezey, T., Le Masne, Q., Goldhahn, J., Staley, A., & Corneli, A. (2023). How Much Evidence Is Enough? Research Sponsor Experiences Seeking Regulatory Acceptance of Digital Health Technology-Derived Endpoints. Digit Biomark, 7(1), 45–53. https://doi.org/10.1159/000529878
Perry, Brian, Lindsay Kehoe, Teresa Swezey, Quentin Le Masne, Jörg Goldhahn, Alicia Staley, and Amy Corneli. “How Much Evidence Is Enough? Research Sponsor Experiences Seeking Regulatory Acceptance of Digital Health Technology-Derived Endpoints.Digit Biomark 7, no. 1 (2023): 45–53. https://doi.org/10.1159/000529878.
Perry B, Kehoe L, Swezey T, Le Masne Q, Goldhahn J, Staley A, et al. How Much Evidence Is Enough? Research Sponsor Experiences Seeking Regulatory Acceptance of Digital Health Technology-Derived Endpoints. Digit Biomark. 2023;7(1):45–53.
Perry, Brian, et al. “How Much Evidence Is Enough? Research Sponsor Experiences Seeking Regulatory Acceptance of Digital Health Technology-Derived Endpoints.Digit Biomark, vol. 7, no. 1, 2023, pp. 45–53. Pubmed, doi:10.1159/000529878.
Perry B, Kehoe L, Swezey T, Le Masne Q, Goldhahn J, Staley A, Corneli A. How Much Evidence Is Enough? Research Sponsor Experiences Seeking Regulatory Acceptance of Digital Health Technology-Derived Endpoints. Digit Biomark. 2023;7(1):45–53.
Journal cover image

Published In

Digit Biomark

DOI

EISSN

2504-110X

Publication Date

2023

Volume

7

Issue

1

Start / End Page

45 / 53

Location

Switzerland