ArticleTherapeutic innovation & regulatory science2026
Real-World Evidence for Drug Approvals: Moving Toward Greater Regulatory Clarity.
Article in Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite a decade of investments and regulatory enthusiasm, real-world evidence (RWE) generated from real-world data (RWD) remains underutilized in drug approvals. Beyond the fundamental need for relevant and reliable RWD, three interdependent operational barriers constrain otherwise fit‑for‑use RWD: (1) FDA submission requirements and data standards policies are centered on CDISC and optimized for traditional trials rather than heterogeneous RWD sources; (2) expectations about when patient‑level datasets must be submitted to FDA and how and when FDA may access or inspect source records are unclear; and (3) uncertainty remains regarding the application of 21 CFR Parts 50/56 to non-interventional studies. On one hand, the resulting regulatory ambiguity around these issues may lead sponsors and data providers to expend resources on RWE that is ultimately unfit for regulatory purposes. On the other, potentially suitable RWD may be ignored. In either case, patient access to effective therapies may be delayed. In this perspective, we offer targeted, actionable recommendations in each category to inform FDA's current efforts to better leverage RWE in regulatory submissions.
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.