ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2025
Characteristics, clinical evidence and implementation effects of conditional approvals for drugs in China, a pooled analysis from 2020 to 2023.
Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Regulatory Convergence in Cell and Gene Therapy: Harmonizing Quality, CMC, and Approval Pathways Across the FDA, EMA, PMDA, and Emerging Markets.Biotech (Basel (Switzerland)) · 2026Review
- Development Timelines of Innovative Drugs in China: A 15-Year Cross-Sectional Analysis of Characteristics and Influencing Factors.Clinical and translational science · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In late 2019, the conditional approval process for drugs in China transitioned from a pilot project to a formal program. Our study comprehensively analyzed 103 conditional approvals (CAs) authorized by the National Medical Products Administration (NMPA) from 2020 to 2023, specifically focusing on their characteristics, clinical evidence, and implementation effects. It also explored the challenges faced by the CA program in China. The primary findings indicated that nearly 90% of China's CAs were granted for antineoplastics agents, and there were no reported cases of CAs withdrawn by NMPA from the market. Notably, a substantial disparity existed in the pivotal premarketing and completed/ongoing postmarketing clinical trial features and endpoints. Additionally, CAs which initiated confirmation clinical trials before the CA application submission were more likely to obtain regular approval. The efficacy evidence of CAs supported by single-arm trials demonstrated statistically significant variances in indication and drug types. However, no statistical distinctions were observed in the efficacy evidence of CAs supported by randomized controlled trials (RCTs). CAs have been shown to decrease the development time, review time, and drug lag period, notably compared to non-CAs, and differences exist in the development time, review time, and drug lag period among CAs. Furthermore, numerous unmet clinical needs and the public health emergency of COVID-19 have been partially addressed through CAs. However, the approval procedures, clinical evidence evaluation systems, pharmacovigilance, and requirements for confirmatory trials within China's CA framework still require further enhancement.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.