Volume 26, Issue 12 pp. 1442-1450
ORIGINAL REPORT

Registries in European post-marketing surveillance: a retrospective analysis of centrally approved products, 2005–2013

Jacoline C. Bouvy

Jacoline C. Bouvy

Department of Pharmacovigilance and Epidemiology, European Medicines Agency, London, UK

Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands

Search for more papers by this author
Kevin Blake

Kevin Blake

Department of Pharmacovigilance and Epidemiology, European Medicines Agency, London, UK

Search for more papers by this author
Jim Slattery

Jim Slattery

Department of Pharmacovigilance and Epidemiology, European Medicines Agency, London, UK

Search for more papers by this author
Marie L. De Bruin

Marie L. De Bruin

Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands

Copenhagen Centre for Regulatory Science, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark

Search for more papers by this author
Peter Arlett

Peter Arlett

Department of Pharmacovigilance and Epidemiology, European Medicines Agency, London, UK

Search for more papers by this author
Xavier Kurz

Corresponding Author

Xavier Kurz

Department of Pharmacovigilance and Epidemiology, European Medicines Agency, London, UK

Correspondence to: X. Kurz, Department of Pharmacovigilance and EpidemiologyEuropean Medicines Agency, 30 Churchill Place, London E14 5EU, UK. Email: [email protected]Search for more papers by this author
First published: 26 March 2017
Citations: 31

Abstract

Purpose

Regulatory agencies and other stakeholders increasingly rely on data collected through registries to support their decision-making. Data from registries are a cornerstone of post-marketing surveillance for monitoring the use of medicines in clinical practice. This study was aimed at gaining further insight into the European Medicines Agency's (EMA) requests for new registries and registry studies using existing registries and to review the experience gained in their conduct.

Methods

European Public Assessment Reports were consulted to identify products for which a request for a registry was made as a condition of the marketing authorisation. All centrally authorised products that received a positive opinion of the EMA Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use between 1 January 2005 and 31 December 2013 were included. Data regarding registry design and experiences were collected from EMA electronic record keeping systems.

Results

Of 392 products that received a positive Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use opinion during 2005–2013, 31 registries were requested for 30 products in total. Sixty-five percent were product registries whereas 35% were disease registries and 71% of the registries had a primary safety objective. Most commonly reported issues with registries were delayed time to start and low patient accrual rates.

Conclusions

The delays found in getting new registries up and running support the need to improve the timeliness of data collection in the post-marketing setting. Methodological challenges met in conducting this study highlighted the need for a clarification of definitions and epidemiological concepts around patient registries. The results will inform the EMA Patient Registry initiative to support use of existing patient registries for the post-authorisation benefit–risk monitoring of medicinal products. © 2017 Commonwealth of Australia. Pharmacoepidemiology & Drug Safety © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.