RESUMEN
Regulatory agencies worldwide have taken significant steps to expedite approval and market authorization of medicines based on their potential to address areas of significant unmet medical need and severe disease burden. However, initial approval of such medicines is often accompanied by limited evidence of benefit, posing a conundrum for payers and health systems who may desire greater certainty of their value. This paper describes a system of "accelerated access" to manage these tensions and coordinate activities across stakeholders, based on discussions held at a multi-stakeholder convening in June 2023. We focus on 6 core, near-term actions that can be taken to improve the current system: clarifying criteria for expedited regulatory approval, enhancing stakeholder coordination, creating expedited pathways in payer and health technology assessment settings, developing joint regulatory/payer/health technology assessment guidance on study design and data needs, linking pricing policy to data uncertainty, and improving patient and public understanding of the processes involved as well as the risks and benefits of the relevant medicines. Many of these actions will require additional resources and personnel, and some will necessitate unprecedented levels of coordination. Nevertheless, each action is designed to work with minimal adjustments to the current system rather than demanding an entirely new approach.
RESUMEN
Accelerated and conditional regulatory pathways for drug approvals are intended to enable earlier patient access to potentially life-saving treatments, or treatments that provide benefits in addressing a significant unmet need. However, there are questions about how well such pathways work, how appropriately they are applied, and how the work of regulators can be better coordinated with that of health technology assessment (HTA) and payer bodies, providers and health systems, and other stakeholders. In June 2023, a multi-stakeholder, international workshop was convened in Adelaide, Australia, to deliberate the challenges, goals, and opportunities to improve accelerated access pathways. Workshop attendees included representatives from patient organizations, regulators, HTA/payer bodies, universities (ethicists, health economists), and companies developing and marketing new medicines from Australia, Asia, Europe, and North America. We reviewed the contents of this workshop to identify areas of agreement and disagreement, report the key themes of the discussion, and delineate next steps for improving accelerated access pathways. We found that there was general agreement among workshop attendees that accelerated access could be improved significantly by strengthening processes for stakeholder coordination, and that coordinated efforts will be required to implement meaningful change moving forward.
RESUMEN
Importance: The Epic Sepsis Model (ESM), a proprietary sepsis prediction model, is implemented at hundreds of US hospitals. The ESM's ability to identify patients with sepsis has not been adequately evaluated despite widespread use. Objective: To externally validate the ESM in the prediction of sepsis and evaluate its potential clinical value compared with usual care. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study was conducted among 27â¯697 patients aged 18 years or older admitted to Michigan Medicine, the academic health system of the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, with 38â¯455 hospitalizations between December 6, 2018, and October 20, 2019. Exposure: The ESM score, calculated every 15 minutes. Main Outcomes and Measures: Sepsis, as defined by a composite of (1) the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention surveillance criteria and (2) International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision diagnostic codes accompanied by 2 systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria and 1 organ dysfunction criterion within 6 hours of one another. Model discrimination was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve at the hospitalization level and with prediction horizons of 4, 8, 12, and 24 hours. Model calibration was evaluated with calibration plots. The potential clinical benefit associated with the ESM was assessed by evaluating the added benefit of the ESM score compared with contemporary clinical practice (based on timely administration of antibiotics). Alert fatigue was evaluated by comparing the clinical value of different alerting strategies. Results: We identified 27â¯697 patients who had 38â¯455 hospitalizations (21â¯904 women [57%]; median age, 56 years [interquartile range, 35-69 years]) meeting inclusion criteria, of whom sepsis occurred in 2552 (7%). The ESM had a hospitalization-level area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.63 (95% CI, 0.62-0.64). The ESM identified 183 of 2552 patients with sepsis (7%) who did not receive timely administration of antibiotics, highlighting the low sensitivity of the ESM in comparison with contemporary clinical practice. The ESM also did not identify 1709 patients with sepsis (67%) despite generating alerts for an ESM score of 6 or higher for 6971 of all 38â¯455 hospitalized patients (18%), thus creating a large burden of alert fatigue. Conclusions and Relevance: This external validation cohort study suggests that the ESM has poor discrimination and calibration in predicting the onset of sepsis. The widespread adoption of the ESM despite its poor performance raises fundamental concerns about sepsis management on a national level.
Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricos , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos/estadística & datos numéricos , Sepsis , Sistemas de Apoyo a Decisiones Clínicas/normas , Femenino , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Humanos , Masculino , Michigan/epidemiología , Persona de Mediana Edad , Puntuaciones en la Disfunción de Órganos , Valor Predictivo de las Pruebas , Pronóstico , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Estudios Retrospectivos , Sepsis/diagnóstico , Sepsis/epidemiología , Sepsis/prevención & controlRESUMEN
PURPOSE: Early detection of anal intraepithelial neoplasia (AIN) and anal squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) by screening will improve clinical outcome. Assessment of anal cytology samples using routine Papanicolaou testing suffers from shortcomings in sensitivity and/or specificity, suggesting that screening tests based on biomarkers may be of value. We tested the suitability in this context of minichromosome maintenance (MCM) proteins, accurate markers of the deregulated cell cycle entry that characterizes malignancy and premalignancy. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We undertook an initial immunohistochemical study of 54 anal tissue samples and validated our findings using an independent prospective cohort study of 235 anal cytology samples from 144 subjects. RESULTS: In the progression from normal anal epithelium through AIN to SCC, there was increasing expression of MCM2 and MCM5, including in the superficial epithelial third, the source of the majority of cells collected by anal swab. The median labeling indices (LI) for MCM2 and MCM5 in the superficial third of AIN2/3 and SCCs combined were 90.2% and 84.0%, respectively. MCM LIs in the superficial layers were significantly greater than LIs for Ki67, an alternative marker of cell cycle entry (P<0.0001). By immunocytochemistry using a mixture of anti-MCM2 and anti-MCM5 antibodies, immunopositive cells were readily identified in anal cytology samples, even at low magnification. MCM testing showed sensitivity for AIN2/3 of 84% (95% confidence interval, 75,93) and for AIN1/viral changes of 76% (68, 84), with overall specificity (for any lesion) of 77% (64, 90). CONCLUSIONS: MCMs are promising biomarkers for improving detection of AIN and SCC in anal cytology samples.