Clinical trials or literature reviews? Get real or face stricter rules
This article was originally published in Clinica
Executive Summary
One of the EU's most powerful regulatory authorities, the UK's Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) believes there are too few clinical trials being undertaken with medical devices. Instead companies tend to favour the less costly literature review route. But is this sufficient to minimise as far as possible the risks associated with device use? Or will there be a backlash with regulators pressing in the near future for stricter clinical trials rules? Consultant Trevor Lewis suggests that companies should take a more objective look at their clinical trial decision-making.
You may also be interested in...
EU Experts Want One-Stop-Shop EU Governance That Mimics Best Of Other Jurisdictions
It may be blue sky thinking to surmise how a new EU medtech regulatory governance structure could evolve. But with change on the horizon, experts see exciting opportunities.
How Ochre Bio Bagged Boehringer For Its RNA-Based Regenerative MASH Therapies
UK-based Ochre Bio has signed its first major deal with Boehringer Ingelheim. Scrip talked to its co-founder and CEO, Jack O’Meara, about its human tissue-based drug discovery platform, its resulting RNA platform for liver disease and how the fledgling drug company's early work mirrored that seen in diagnostics.
IGI Bets On Trispecific Antibody To Make Inroads Into Big Pharma Myeloma Turf
Ichnos Glenmark Innovation’s president and CEO talks to Scrip about the promising activity profile of the alliance’s early stage trispecific antibody versus Janssen’s teclistamab and also maintains that the setback for Gilead’s magrolimab hasn’t eclipsed prospects for its bispecific antibody.