Expert elicitation of the timing and uncertainty to establish a geologic sequestration well for CO2 in the United States.

Many studies anticipate that carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) will be essential to decarbonizing the U.S. economy. However, prior work has not estimated the time required to develop, approve, and implement a geologic sequestration site in the United States. We generate such an estimate by identifying six clearance points that must be passed before a sequestration site can become operational. For each clearance point (CP), we elicit expert judgments of the time required in the form of probability distributions and then use stochastic simulation to combine and sum the results. We find that, on average, there is a 90% chance that the time required lies between 5.5 and 9.6 y, with an upper bound of 12 y. Even using the most optimistic expert judgements, the lower bound on time is 2.7 y, and the upper bound is 8.3 y. Using the most pessimistic judgements, the lower bound is 3.5 y and the upper bound is 19.2 y. These estimates suggest that strategies must be found to safely accelerate the process. We conclude the paper by discussing seven potential strategies.

Lessons Learned from Approval of Aducanumab for Alzheimer's Disease.

When the US Food and Drug Administration used the accelerated approval process to authorize the use of the antiamyloid drug aducanumab to treat Alzheimer's disease (AD), many people hoped this signaled a new era of disease-modifying treatment. But 2 years later, aducanumab's failure to launch provides a cautionary tale about the complexities of dementia and the need for a thorough and transparent review of the role that regulatory agencies and various stakeholders play in approving AD drugs. We highlight the events leading to aducanumab's controversial approval and discuss some of the key lessons learned from the drug's failure to deliver the hoped-for benefits. These lessons include the inherent limitations of antiamyloid strategies for a complex disease in which amyloid is only one of several pathological processes, the need for clinical trials that better reflect the diversity of communities affected by AD, the potential pitfalls of futility analyses in clinical trials, the need for greater transparency and other modifications to the approval process, and the dementia field's unreadiness to move from the highly controlled environment of clinical trials to the widespread and chronic use of resource-intensive, disease-modifying drugs in real-world treatment scenarios. People with dementia desperately need effective therapies. We hope that the aducanumab story will inspire changes to the approval process-changes that restore public trust and improve future efforts to deliver disease-modifying therapies to the clinic.

Regulatory Considerations in the Approval of Rezafungin (Rezzayo) for the Treatment of Candidemia and Invasive Candidiasis in Adults.

On 22 March 2023, the FDA approved rezafungin (Rezzayo) for the treatment of candidemia and invasive candidiasis in adults with limited or no alternative treatment options. Rezafungin is an echinocandin that supports weekly dosing, enabling outpatient parenteral treatment that potentially avoids the need for a central venous catheter. Approval of rezafungin was based on a single adequate and well-controlled phase 3 study designed with a day 30 all-cause mortality primary end point and 20% noninferiority margin, which demonstrated that rezafungin is noninferior to the comparator echinocandin. Nonclinical studies of rezafungin in nonhuman primates identified a neurotoxicity safety signal; however, rezafungin's safety profile in the completed clinical studies was similar to other Food and Drug Administration-approved echinocandins. Here we describe the rationale for this approval and important considerations during the review process for a flexible development program intended to expedite the availability of antimicrobial therapies to treat serious infections in patients with limited treatment options. Clinical Trials Registration . NCT02734862 and NCT03667690.

Guidance for securing approvals for new biomarkers: from discovery to clinical implementation.

The journey of translating a molecular discovery into the clinic involves multiple steps and requires planning, time, effort, and money. In this review, we provide a quick guide on the technical and clinical validation parameters that are necessary for successful commercialization of molecular and other markers. We also briefly address the different options for regulatory approvals. Successful clinical implantation depends on rigorous technical and clinical validation, and the ability to develop clear guidelines for the indications for testing (i.e. which patients are eligible to have this test), the frequency of testing, and also a clear interpretation of test results. Successful implementation requires providing evidence that the results of this test can be used to improve patient care. There are currently multiple routes for implementation of clinical molecular tests, which include regulatory agency- approved companion diagnostics, laboratory developed tests, or direct-to-consumer testing. Regulatory approval is considered the gold-standard, but it requires time and resources. There is an ongoing debate about the need for regulatory approval of laboratory developed testing. Ongoing oversight is maintained through lab accreditation and proficiency testing programs, which provide a common approach to ensuring high standards and consistent performance in clinical molecular labs. Before moving into the clinic, confirmation of both the clinical and analytic validity of a new molecular test is essential.

Implementation of Digital Pathology and Artificial Intelligence in Routine Pathology Practice.

The advent of affordable technology has significantly influenced the practice of digital pathology, leading to its growing adoption within the pathology community. This review article aimed to outline the latest developments in digital pathology, the cutting-edge advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) applications within this field, and the pertinent United States regulatory frameworks. The content is based on a thorough analysis of original research articles and official United States Federal guidelines. Findings from our review indicate that several Food and Drug Administration-approved digital scanners and image management systems are establishing a solid foundation for the seamless integration of advanced technologies into everyday pathology workflows, which may reduce device and operational costs in the future. AI is particularly transforming the way morphologic diagnoses are automated, notably in cancers like prostate and colorectal, within screening initiatives, albeit challenges such as data privacy issues and algorithmic biases remain. The regulatory environment, shaped by standards from the Food and Drug Administration, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services/Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments, and College of American Pathologists, is evolving to accommodate these innovations while ensuring safety and reliability. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services/Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments have issued policies to allow pathologists to review and render diagnoses using digital pathology remotely. Moreover, the introduction of new digital pathology Current Procedural Terminology codes designed to complement existing pathology Current Procedural Terminology codes is facilitating reimbursement processes. Overall, these advancements are heralding a new era in pathology that promises enhanced diagnostic precision and efficiency through digital and AI technologies, potentially improving patient care as well as bolstering educational and research activities.

Applying propensity methods to the United States transplant registry for external real-world evidence control arms for 5-year survival in the BENEFIT study.

To address the challenges of assessing the impact of a reasonably likely surrogate endpoint on long-term graft survival in prospective kidney transplant clinical trials, the Transplant Therapeutics Consortium established a real-world evidence workgroup evaluating the scientific value of using transplant registry data as an external control to supplement the internal control group. The United Network for Organ Sharing retrospectively simulated the use of several distinct contemporaneous external control groups, applied multiple cause inference methods, and compared treatment effects to those observed in the BENEFIT study. Applying BENEFIT study enrollment criteria produced a smaller historical cyclosporine control arm (n = 153) and a larger, alternative (tacrolimus) historical control arm (n = 1069). Following covariate-balanced propensity scoring, Kaplan-Meier 5-year all-cause graft survivals were 81.3% and 81.7% in the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) tacrolimus and cyclosporine external control arms, similar to 80.3% observed in the BENEFIT cyclosporine treatment arm. Five-year graft survival in the belatacept-less intensive arm was significantly higher than the OPTN controls using propensity scoring for comparing cyclosporine and tacrolimus. Propensity weighting using OPTN controls closely mirrored the BENEFIT study's long-term control (cyclosporine) arm's survival rate and the less intensive arm's treatment effect (significantly higher survival vs control). This study supports the feasibility and validity of using supplemental external registry controls for long-term survival in kidney transplant clinical trials.

The Rochester Protocol for Living Donor Liver Transplantation of Unresectable Colorectal Liver Metastasis: A 5-Year Report on Selection, Approval, and Outcomes.

Living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is a treatment option for select patients with unresectable colorectal liver metastasis (uCRLM). We describe our center's experience of patient selection, insurance approval, and outcomes after LDLT after first referral in March 2019. Of the 206 evaluated patients, twenty-three underwent LDLT. We found that patients who were referred earlier in their oncologic course were more likely to be eligible for transplantation. After completion of the Rochester Protocol for LDLT eligibility, recipients had a median delay of care of 10 days (IQR 0-36) related to insurance appeal, with six patients (30%) having a delay longer than 30 days. LDLT recipients had an overall survival proportion of 100% and 91% at 1, and 3 years; and a recurrence-free survival proportion of 100% and 40%, at 1 and 3 years, respectively. All donors underwent right hepatectomy, of which only one donor had a Clavien-Dindo IIIa complication and readmission. There was no donor mortality. We assert that multidisciplinary care and strict patient selection through the Rochester Protocol were paramount to our center's success. In the appropriately selected patient, LDLT for uCRLM may be justified, and patients should be referred to transplant oncology centers for evaluation.

Community consensus for Heparan sulfate as a biomarker to support accelerated approval in Neuronopathic Mucopolysaccharidoses.

Mucopolysaccharidoses (MPS) disorders are a group of ultra-rare, inherited, lysosomal storage diseases caused by enzyme deficiencies that result in accumulation of glycosaminoglycans (GAGs) in cells throughout the body including the brain, typically leading to early death. Current treatments do not address the progressive cognitive impairment observed in patients with neuronopathic MPS disease. The rarity and clinical heterogeneity of these disorders as well as pre-existing brain disease in clinically diagnosed patients make the development of new therapeutics utilizing a traditional regulatory framework extremely challenging. Children with neuronopathic MPS disorders will likely sustain irreversible brain damage if randomized to a placebo or standard-of-care treatment arm that does not address brain disease. The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recognized these challenges, and, in 2020, issued final guidance for industry on slowly progressive, low-prevalence, rare diseases with substrate deposition that result from single enzyme defects, outlining a path for generating evidence of effectiveness to support accelerated approval based on reduction of substrate accumulation [1]. Neuronopathic MPS disorders, which are characterized by the accumulation of the GAG heparan sulfate (HS) in the brain, fit the intended disease characteristics for which this guidance was written, but to date, this guidance has not yet been applied to any therapeutic candidate for MPS. In February 2024, the Reagan-Udall Foundation for the FDA convened a public workshop for representatives from the FDA, patient advocacy groups, clinical and basic science research, and industry to explore a case study of using cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) HS as a relevant biomarker to support accelerated approval of new therapeutics for neuronopathic MPS disorders. This review provides a summary of the MPS presentations at the workshop and perspective on the path forward for neuronopathic MPS disorders.

Financial conflicts of interest among presenters, panellists and moderators at haematology and oncology FDA workshops.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the characteristics and financial conflicts of interest of presenters, panellists and moderators at haematology and oncology workshops held jointly with or hosted by the US FDA. SETTING: We included information on all publicly available haematology or oncology FDA workshop agendas held between 1 January 2018 and 31 December 2022. EXPOSURE: General and research payments reported on Open Payments, industry funding to patient advocacy organizations reported on their webpages or 990 tax forms and employment in both pharmaceutical and regulatory settings. RESULTS: Among physicians eligible for payments, 78% received at least one payment from the industry between 2017 and 2021. The mean general payment amount was $82,170 for all years ($16,434 per year) and the median was $14,906 for all years ($2981 per year). Sixty-nine per cent of patient advocacy speakers were representing organizations that received financial support from the pharmaceutical industry. Among those representing regulatory agencies or pharmaceutical companies, 16% had worked in both settings during their careers. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Our findings in this cross-sectional study show a majority of US-based physician presenters at haematology and oncology workshops held jointly with members of the US FDA have some financial conflict of interest with the pharmaceutical industry. These findings support the need for clear disclosures and suggest that a more balanced selection of presenters with fewer conflicts may help to limit bias in discussions between multiple stakeholders.

A Milestone in the Treatment of Ataxias: Approval of Omaveloxolone for Friedreich Ataxia.

The exciting news about the US FDA approval of omaveloxolone as the first-ever drug to be approved for an inherited ataxia is welcome news for patients and families that deal with this devastating disease as well as for health care providers and investigators with an interest in this and other rare diseases. This event is the culmination of long and fruitful collaboration between patients, their families, clinicians, laboratory researchers, patient advocacy organizations, industry, and regulatory agencies. The process has generated intense discussion about outcome measures, biomarkers, trial design, and the nature of approval process for such diseases. It also has brought hope and enthusiasm for increasingly better therapies for genetic diseases in general.

Recent advances of 3-fucosyllactose in health effects and production.

Human milk oligosaccharides (HMOs) have been recognized as gold standard for infant development. 3-Fucosyllactose (3-FL), being one of the Generally Recognized as Safe HMOs, represents a core trisaccharide within the realm of HMOs; however, it has received comparatively less attention in contrast to extensively studied 2'-fucosyllactose. The objective of this review is to comprehensively summarize the health effects of 3-FL, including its impact on gut microbiota proliferation, antimicrobial effects, immune regulation, antiviral protection, and brain maturation. Additionally, the discussion also covers the commercial application and regulatory approval status of 3-FL. Lastly, an organized presentation of large-scale production methods for 3-FL aims to provide a comprehensive guide that highlights current strategies and challenges in optimization.

Emerging drugs for the treatment of irritability associated with autism spectrum disorder.

INTRODUCTION: Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is an early-onset disorder with a prevalence of 1% among children and reported disability-adjusted life years of 4.31 million. Irritability is a challenging behavior associated with ASD, for which medication development has lagged. More specifically, pharmacotherapy effectiveness may be limited against high adverse effects (considering side effect profiles and patient medication sensitivity); thus, the possible benefits of pharmacological interventions must be balanced against potential adverse events in each patient. AREAS COVERED: After reviewing the neuropathophysiology of ASD-associated irritability, the benefits and tolerability of emerging medications in its treatment based on randomized controlled trials were detailed in light of mechanisms and targets of action. EXPERT OPINION: Succeeding risperidone and aripiprazole, monotherapy with memantine may be beneficial. In addition, N-acetylcysteine, galantamine, sulforaphane, celecoxib, palmitoylethanolamide, pentoxifylline, simvastatin, minocycline, amantadine, pregnenolone, prednisolone, riluzole, propentofylline, pioglitazone, and topiramate, all adjunct to risperidone, and clonidine and methylphenidate outperformed placebo. These effects were through glutamatergic, γ-aminobutyric acidergic, inflammatory, oxidative, cholinergic, dopaminergic, and serotonergic systems. All medications were reported to be safe and tolerable. Considering sample size, follow-up, and effect size, further studies are necessary. Along with drug development, repositioning and combining existing drugs supported by the mechanism of action is recommended.

Development of sleepiness in professional truck drivers: Real-road testing for driver drowsiness and attention warning (DDAW) system evaluation.

All new vehicle types within the European Union must now be equipped with a driver drowsiness and attention warning system starting from 2022. The specific requirements for the test procedure necessary for type approval are defined in the Annex of EU Regulation C/2021/2639. The objectives of this study were to: (i) investigate how sleepiness develops in professional truck drivers under real-road driving conditions; and (ii) assess the feasibility of a test procedure for validating driver drowsiness and attention warning systems according to the EU regulation. Twenty-four professional truck drivers participated in the test. They drove for 180 km on a dual-lane motorway, first during daytime after a normal night's sleep and then at nighttime after being awake since early morning. The results showed higher sleepiness levels during nighttime driving compared with daytime, with a faster increase in sleepiness with distance driven, especially during the night. Psychomotor vigilance task results corroborated these findings. From a driver drowsiness and attention warning testing perspective, the study design with sleep-deprived drivers at night was successful in inducing the targeted sleepiness level of a Karolinska Sleepiness Scale score of ≥ 8. Many drivers who reported a Karolinska Sleepiness Scale ≥ 8 during the drives also acknowledged feeling sleepy in the post-drive questionnaire. Reaching high levels of sleepiness on real roads during daytime is more problematic, not the least from legal and ethical perspectives as higher traffic densities during the daytime lead to increased risks.

Toward Patient-Centered Drug Approval for Treatment of Rare Diseases.

OBJECTIVES: This commentary seeks to improve the design and analysis of trials undertaken to obtain approval of drugs for treatment of rare diseases. METHODS: Methodological analysis reveals that use of hypothesis testing in the Food and Drug Administration drug approval process is harmful. Conventional asymmetric error probabilities bias the approval process against approval of new drugs. Hypothesis testing is inattentive to the relative magnitudes of losses to patient welfare when types 1 and 2 errors occur. Requiring the sample size to be large enough to guarantee the specified statistical power particularly inhibits the development of new drugs for treating rare diseases. Rarity of a disease makes it difficult to enroll the number of trial subjects needed to meet the statistical power standards for drug approval. RESULTS: Use of statistical decision theory in drug approval would overcome these serious deficiencies of hypothesis testing. Sample size would remain relevant to drug approval, but the criterion used to evaluate sample size would change. Rather than judging sample size by statistical power, the Food and Drug Administration could require a sample to be large enough to provide a specified nearness to optimality of the approval decision. CONCLUSIONS: Using nearness to optimality to set sample size and making approval decisions to minimize distance from optimality would particularly benefit the evaluation of drugs for treatment of rare diseases. It would enable a dramatic reduction in sample size relative to current norms, without compromising the clinical informativeness of trials.

It Takes 2 to Tango. Setting Out the Conditions in Which Performance-Based Risk-Sharing Arrangements Work for Both Parties.

OBJECTIVES: Faster regulatory approval processes often fail to achieve faster patient access. We seek an approach, using performance-based risk-sharing arrangements, to address uncertainty for payers regarding the relative effectiveness and value for money of products launched through accelerated approval schemes. One important reason for risk sharing is to resolve differences of opinion between innovators and payers about a technology's underlying value. To date, there has been no formal attempt to set out the circumstances in which risk sharing can address these differences. METHODS: We use a value of information framework to understand what a performance-based risk-sharing arrangements can, in principle, add to a reimbursement scheme, separating payer perspectives on cost-effectiveness and the value of research from those of the innovator. We find 16 scenarios, developing 5 rules to analyze these 16 scenarios, identifying cases in which risk sharing adds value for both parties. RESULTS: We find that risk sharing provides an improved solution in 9 out of 16 combinations of payer and innovator expectations about treatment outcome and the value of further research. Among our assumptions, who pays for research and scheme administration costs are key. CONCLUSIONS: Steps should be undertaken to make risk sharing more practical, ensuring that payers consider it an option. This requires additional costs to the health system falling on the innovator in an efficient way that aligns incentives for product development for global markets. Health systems benefits are earlier patient access to cost-effective treatments and payers with higher confidence of not wasting money. Innovators get greater returns while conducting research.

Clinically Important Benefits and Harms of Monoclonal Antibodies Targeting Amyloid for the Treatment of Alzheimer Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

PURPOSE: We conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate clinically meaningful benefits and harms of monoclonal antibodies targeting amyloid in patients with Alzheimer dementia. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and 5 trial registries, as well as the reference lists of identified studies. We included randomized controlled trials comparing a monoclonal antibody with placebo at a dose consistent with that used in phase 3 trials or for Food and Drug Administration approval. Studies had to report at least 1 clinically relevant benefit or harm. Data were extracted independently by at least 2 researchers for random effects meta-analysis. Changes in cognitive and functional scales were compared between groups, and each difference was assessed to determine if it met the minimal clinically important difference (MCID). RESULTS: We identified 19 publications with 23,202 total participants that evaluated 8 anti-amyloid antibodies. There were small improvements over placebo in the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale (ADAS)-Cog-11 to -14 score (standardized mean difference = -0.07; 95% CI, -0.10 to -0.04), Mini Mental State Examination score (0.32 points; 95% CI, 0.13 to 0.50), and Clinical Dementia Rating-Sum of Boxes scale score (mean difference =-0.18 points; 95% CI, -0.34 to -0.03), and the combined functional scores (standardized mean difference = 0.09; 95% CI, 0.05 to 0.13). None of the changes, including those for lecanemab, aducanumab, and donanemab, exceeded the MCID. Harms included significantly increased risks of amyloid-related imaging abnormalities (ARIA)-edema (relative risk [RR] = 10.29; number needed to harm [NNH] = 9), ARIA-hemorrhage (RR = 1.74; NNH = 13), and symptomatic ARIA-edema (RR = 24.3; NNH = 86). CONCLUSIONS: Although monoclonal antibodies targeting amyloid provide small benefits on cognitive and functional scales in patients with Alzheimer dementia, these improvements are far below the MCID for each outcome and are accompanied by clinically meaningful harms.

Fixed Versus Body-Sized-Based Dosing of Monoclonal Antibodies.

Monoclonal antibody products are an increasing portion of novel drug approvals. The labeling of initial drug approvals frequently involves body-size-based rather than fixed-dose administration regimens for adults without clear rationale for doing so. This presents challenges when prescribing these products for patients with extremes of body habitus who constitute a small portion of enrollment in pre-approval investigations. Fixed-dose regimens allow for standardized preparation with the potential to reduce the risk of calculation errors, drug waste, and make home administration more practical. Fixed-dose rather than body-size-based monoclonal antibody regimens should serve as the initial approach in early phase 1 clinical trials.

Resmetirom: The First Food and Drug Administration-Approved Medication for Nonalcoholic Steatohepatitis (NASH).

OBJECTIVE: To review the literature leading to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of the first medication, resmetirom, for the treatment of nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH), including the pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, clinical studies, dosing, and adverse effects. Relevant data will be used to discuss how resmetirom impacts clinical practice. DATA SOURCES: A literature search was conducted using MEDLINE from database inception to May 12, 2024. Keywords included non-alcoholic steatohepatitis, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, and resmetirom. Study selection, data extraction and all English-language studies involving the use of resmetirom for nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD)/NASH were included. DATA SYNTHESIS: Resmetirom, a thyroid hormone receptor agonist, is administered at daily doses of either 80 mg or 100 mg. The drug was shown to provide NASH resolution as assessed by the NAFLD activity score, 80 mg-24.2%, 100 mg-25.9% compared to 14.2% with the placebo group (P < 0.001). Resmetirom, improved liver fibrosis, 80 mg-25.9%, 100 mg-29.9% compared to 9.7% with the placebo group (P < 0.001). Resmetirom's ability to improve fibrosis in patients with F2-F3 fibrosis offers valuable benefit for patients at risk of progressing to cirrhosis. RELEVANCE TO PATIENT CARE AND CLINICAL PRACTICE: Resmetirom expands the medication options available to treat patients with NASH which can be given alongside other medications to optimize metabolic factors such as glucagon-like peptide-1 and hydroxymethylglutaryl-coenzyme A reductase inhibitors. Resmetirom was well tolerated in studies. CONCLUSION: Resmetirom serves as an attractive option in patients diagnosed with NASH with evidence of advanced fibrosis (F2-F3) in combination with exercise, diet, and other multimodal therapies targeting metabolic risk factors.

Impact of institutional review board stipulations on turnaround time for approvals of surgical studies.

BACKGROUND: We have examined the number and types of stipulations received following the submission of surgical study protocols to the Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) for review, and their effect on turnaround time for approval. This analysis will enable our organization to improve the quality of applications and design of study protocols, which can streamline the approval process and increase efficiency of the startup phase for clinical research. METHODS: IRB stipulations for 48 surgical studies were analyzed. Various factors were assessed: surgical specialty, type of study by design, clinical trial phase, type of investigational product, type of IRB utilized (local or centralized), study complexity score, type of review (e.g., exempt, expedited, or full board), turnaround time, and number of stipulations received. Statistical analyses were performed to examine associations between the number/type of stipulations received during the IRB review process and any of the aforementioned study-related factors. RESULTS: For analyzed surgical studies, the number of stipulations allotted to a study and time taken for approval had moderate association with the complexity of the study. The turnaround time for approval was the highest for randomized, controlled trials and studies undergoing full board review. CONCLUSION: This study elucidates characteristics that are associated with increased time for IRB approval. Analysis of IRB stipulations can help improve the turnaround time for the approval process, increase efficiency of startup phase, and transition to execution phase faster, which will allow more time for enrollment of research subjects, and increase return on investment made into research and development programs.

Research encouraging off-label use of quetiapine: A systematic meta-epidemiological analysis.

BACKGROUND: Researchers often conduct small studies on testing a drug's efficacy in off-label indications. If positive results from these exploratory studies are not followed up by larger, randomized, double-blinded trials, physicians cannot be sure of a drug's clinical value. This may lead to off-label prescriptions of ineffective treatments. We aim to describe the way clinical studies fostered off-label prescription of the antipsychotic drug quetiapine (Seroquel). METHODS: In this systematic meta-epidemiological analysis, we searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane CENTRAL and PsycINFO databases and included clinical studies testing quetiapine for unapproved indications between May 1995 and May 2022. We then assessed the frequency with which publications providing low-level evidence suggesting efficacy of quetiapine for off-label indications was not followed up by large, randomized and double-blinded trials within 5 years. RESULTS: In total, 176 published studies were identified that reported potential efficacy of quetiapine in at least 26 indications. Between 2000 and 2007, publication of exploratory studies suggesting promise for off-label indications rapidly outpaced publication of confirmatory trials. In the 24 indications with a minimum of 5 years of follow-up from the first positive exploratory study, 19 (79%) were not followed up with large confirmatory trials within 5 years. At least nine clinical practice guidelines recommend the use of quetiapine for seven off-label indications in which published confirmatory evidence is lacking. CONCLUSION: Many small, post-approval studies suggested the promise of quetiapine for numerous off-label indications. These findings generally went unconfirmed in large, blinded, randomized trials years after first being published. The imbalance of exploratory and confirmatory studies likely encourages ineffective off-label treatment.