Skip to main content

Factors associated with success of market authorisation applications for pharmaceutical drugs submitted to the European Medicines Agency

Abstract

Purpose

To identify factors associated with success of Market Authorisation Applications (MAAs) for pharmaceutical drugs submitted to the European Medicines Agency (EMEA), with an emphasis on the Scientific Advice (SA) given by the Committee for Human Medicinal Products (CHMP).

Methods

MAAs with a CHMP decision (outcome) between 1 January 2004 and 31 December 2007 were included in the analysis. Factors evaluated were: company size, orphan drug (OD) status, product type, existence of SA, compliance with SA, therapeutic area and year of outcome. Compliance with SA was retrospectively assessed with reference to three critical clinical variables in pivotal studies: choice of primary endpoint, selection of control and statistical methods.

Results

Of 188 MAAs with an outcome, 137 (72.9%) were approved, whereas 51 (27.1%) were not approved or were withdrawn by the company. In the simple logistic regression analysis, company size [odds ratio (OR) 2.96, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.92; 4.56, p < 0.0001) was positively correlated with a positive outcome, whereas OD status (OD vs. non-OD: OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.19; 0.77, p = 0.0067) was negatively correlated. A total of 59 (31.4%) MAAs had obtained SA related to one or more of the three critical variables. Thirty-nine of these were assessed as being compliant with SA. Obtaining an SA per se was not associated with outcome (SA vs. no-SA: OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.49; 1.88, p = 0.92), but complying with SA was significantly associated with positive outcome (compliant with SA vs. no-SA: OR 14.71, 95% CI 1.95; 111.2; non-compliant with SA vs. no-SA: OR 0.17, 95% CI 0.06; 0.47, p < 0.0001). Stepwise regression analysis revealed that company size and SA compliance were independent predictors of outcome. The proportion of the MAAs that had received SA increased from 22% in 2004 to 47% in 2007. Company size and product type were associated with the frequency of requesting SA (26, 33 and 46% for small, medium-sized and large companies, respectively; 16, 39 and 48% for known chemical substances, new chemical substances and biologics, respectively). Factors related to compliance with SA were company size and OD status (25, 60 and 84% for small, medium-sized, and large companies, respectively; 77 and 38% for non-OD and OD status, respectively).

Conclusions

The strong association between company size and outcome suggests that resources and experience in drug development and obtaining regulatory approval are critical factors for a successful MAA. In addition, obtaining and complying with SA appears to be a predictor of outcome. Based on this analysis, companies, particularly smaller ones and those developing orphan drugs, are recommended to engage in a dialogue with European regulators via the SA procedure. Obtaining SA early in development and at major transition points as well as compliance with the advice given by the CHMP are recommended.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  1. European Medicines Agency (EMEA) (2007) Final Report from the EMEA/CHMP-Think-Tank Group on Innovative Drug Development “Innovative Drug Development Approaches”. EMEA headquarters, London. Available at: http://www.emea.europa.eu/pdfs/human/itf/12731807en.pdf

  2. Federal Drug Administration (FDA) (2006) Innovation/stagnation: critical path opportunities report. FDA Report, March 2006. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/oc/initiatives/criticalpath/reports/opp_report.pdf

  3. Bretz F, Koenig F, Brannath W, Glimm E, Posch M (2009) Adaptive designs for confirmatory clinical trials. Stat Med 28(8):1181–1217

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Koenig F, Brannath W, Bretz F, Posch M (2008) Adaptive Dunnett tests for treatment selection. Stat Med 27:1612–1625

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. EMEA (2008) Report on the EMEA-EFPIA Workshop on Adaptive Designs in Confirmatory Clinical Trials. EMEA Headquarters, London. Available at: http://www.emea.europa.eu/pdfs/conferenceflyers/report_adaptivedesigns.pdf

  6. EMEA (2009) Second EMEA-EFPIA Workshop on Adaptive Design in Confirmatory Clinical Trials. Presentations available at: http://www.efpia.eu/content/default.asp?PageID=606

  7. EMEA (2009) EMEA Workshop on Monoclonal Antibodies. Presentations available at: http://www.emea.europa.eu/meetings/conferences/2jul09.htm

  8. EMEA (2009) Qualification of novel methodologies for drug development: guidance to applicants. Doc. Ref. EMEA/CHMP/SAWP/72894/2008 Corr1. EMEA Headquarters, London. Available at: http://www.emea.europa.eu/pdfs/human/biomarkers/7289408en.pdf

  9. Pignatti F, Aronsson B, Gate N et al (2002) The review of drug applications submitted to the European Medicines Evaluation Agency: frequently raised objection, and outcome. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 58:573–580

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Aronsson B (2000) Applications in the centralised procedure 1995 to July 2000. An analysis of outcomes. Available at: http://www.emea.europa.eu/pdfs/human/regaffair/060200en.pdf

  11. Baylis E (ed) (2006) Scrip pharmaceutical company league tables. Scrips Reports, London

    Google Scholar 

  12. FDA (2004) Innovation or stagnation. Challenge and opportunity on the critical path to new medicinal products. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/oc/initiatives/criticalpath/whitepaper.pdf

  13. DiMasi JA, Manocchia M (1977) Initiatives to speed new drug development and regulatory review: the impact of FDA-sponsor conferences. Drug Info J 31:771778

    Google Scholar 

  14. FDA (2006) Independent evaluation of FDA’s first cycle review performance—retrospective analysis. Final report. Available at: http://www.FDA.gov

  15. Guedj I, Scharfstein D (2004) Organizational scope and investment: evidence from the drug development strategies and performance of biopharmaceutical firms. NBER Working Paper 10933. National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge

  16. Heemstra HE, de Vrueh RL, van Weely S et al (2007) Predictors of orphan drug approval in the European Union. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 64:545–552

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We want to thank Nikolaos Zafiropoulos and Francesco Pignatti for fruitful discussions throughout the preparation of this manuscript.

Disclaimer

The views expressed in this article are the personal views of the authors and may not be understood or quoted as being made on behalf of or reflecting the position of the EMEA or one of its committees or working parties.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jan Regnstrom.

Additional information

Jan Regnstrom and Franz Koenig contributed equally to this paper

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Regnstrom, J., Koenig, F., Aronsson, B. et al. Factors associated with success of market authorisation applications for pharmaceutical drugs submitted to the European Medicines Agency. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 66, 39 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00228-009-0756-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00228-009-0756-y

Keywords

  • Drug approval
  • Drug development
  • Regulatory
  • Scientific advice