Perspectives on how to build bridges between regulation, health technology assessment and clinical guideline development: a qualitative focus group study with European experts

OBJECTIVE

Improving synergy among regulation, health technology assessment (HTA) and clinical guideline development is relevant as these independent processes are building on shared evidence-based grounds. The two objectives were first to assess how convergence of evidentiary needs among stakeholders may be achieved, and second, to determine to what extent convergence can be achieved.

DESIGN

Qualitative study using eight online dual-moderator focus groups.

SETTING

Discussions had a European focus and were contextualised in four case studies on head and neck cancer, diabetes mellitus, multiple sclerosis and myelodysplastic syndromes.

PARTICIPANTS

Forty-two experienced (over 10 years) European regulators, HTA representatives and clinicians participated in the discussion.

INTERVENTIONS

Participants received information on the case study and research topic in advance. An introductory background presentation and interview guide for the moderators were used to steer the discussion.

RESULTS

Convergence may be achieved through improved communication institutionalised in multistakeholder early dialogues, shared definitions and shared methods. Required data sets should be inclusive rather than aligned. Deliberation and decision-making should remain independent. Alignment could be sought for pragmatic clinical trial designs and patient registries. Smaller and lower-income countries should be included in these efforts.

CONCLUSION

Actors in the field expressed that improving synergy among stakeholders always involves trade-offs. A balance needs to be found between the convergence of processes and the institutional remits or geographical independence. A similar tension exists between the involvement of more actors, for example, patients or additional countries, and the level of collaboration that may be achieved. Communication is key to establishing this balance.

Suspected adverse reactions reported for blood, blood components, and blood products in VigiBase

INTRODUCTION

Since being designated as medicines by World Health Organization (WHO), blood components are subject to pharmacovigilance reporting. Using VigiBase, the WHO global database of individual case safety reports (ICSRs), we characterized reports of adverse reactions for all blood products.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

ICSRs involving blood products as the suspected medicine in VigiBase between 1968 and 2021 were extracted. MedDRA preferred terms and the International Society of Blood Transfusion haemovigilance definitions were used to stratify adverse reactions. Descriptive statistics were used to characterize ICSR demographics.

RESULTS

A total of 111,033 ICSRs containing 577,577 suspected adverse reactions with 6152 MedDRA preferred terms were reported for 34 blood products. There were 12,153 (10.9%) reports for blood components, 98,135 (88.4%) reports for plasma-derived medicines, and 745 (0.7%) reports for recombinant products. The majority of reports (21.0% and 19.7%, respectively) were from patients aged 45-64 and over 65 years. The Americas contributed the most ICSRs (49.7%). Top reported suspected adverse reactions were for the following MedDRA preferred terms: headache (3.5%), pyrexia (2.8%), chills (2.8%), dyspnoea (1.8%), and nausea (1.8%).

CONCLUSION

VigiBase already has a large number of reports on blood products. When compared to other existing haemovigilance databases, our study found reports from a broader range of countries and reporters. This may provide us with new perspectives, but for VigiBase to reach its full potential in haemovigilance some alterations in what is captured in reports are required.