Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37853917›Full record

ArticleClinical and translational science2023

Precision medicine in regulatory decision making: Biomarkers used for patient selection in European Public Assessment Reports from 2018 to 2020.

Elisabeth Bakker, Viktoriia Starokozhko, Jet W M Kraaijvanger, Hiddo J L Heerspink, Peter G M Mol

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical and translational science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Elisabeth BakkerUniversity Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-3359-9588
Viktoriia StarokozhkoUniversity Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Jet W M KraaijvangerDutch Medicines Evaluation Board, CBG-MEB, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Hiddo J L HeerspinkUniversity Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Peter G M MolUniversity Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
University Medical Center Groningen · NLMedicines Evaluation Board · NL

Funding

Horizon Europe Research and Innovation Actions 101095146Innovative Medicines Initiative 115974
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Biomarkers can guide precision medicine in clinical trials and practice. They can increase clinical trials' efficiency through selection of study populations more likely to benefit from treatment, thus increasing statistical power and reducing sample size requirements or study duration. We performed a narrative synthesis to explore biomarker utilization for patient selection to guide precision medicine trials in marketing authorization dossiers of centrally approved medicines in Europe between 2018 and 2020 and analyzed in-depth those that eventually included biomarkers in the medicines' indications. From 119 eligible products, 26 included a biomarker in the indication, of which most were oncology products (n = 15). Included biomarkers were often known from literature or from previously approved products in the European Union or the United States. Additionally, 52 dossiers mentioned one or more biomarkers for patient selection in their clinical efficacy and safety information. Although these were not always included in the medicines' indication, they were often implicitly embedded in condition definitions adopted from clinical guidelines or practice. In 15 out of the 26 medicines with a biomarker-guided indication, only biomarker-positive populations were included in the main clinical studies supporting the marketing authorization. These studies were mostly randomized controlled trials or single-arm trials; only two products were studied for multiple indications in an innovative basket trial. Definitions of biomarkers could be subject of debate and needed adaptation after post hoc analyses requested by the assessment committee in four cases, stressing the importance of thorough justification of these definitions to include the right population for an optimal benefit-risk balance, enabling precise medicine.

Indexed as

Decision MakingPrecision MedicineBiomarkersDrug ApprovalEuropeHumansPatient SelectionUnited StatesBiomarkers

Identifiers

PMID37853917
PMCPMC10651650
OpenAlexW4387765771

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.