A major change in the approach to drug safety surveillance after marketing has been introduced in the last 5 years in the EU in the form of risk management planning. This has been incorporated into EU law and is extensively covered by guidelines in Volume 9A. There has been a similar initiative by the US FDA.
For the EU, it is mandatory for companies to submit a Risk Management Plan in accordance with a detailed template and guideline at the time of application for a Marketing Authorisation for most products. Plans also have to be submitted if new safety concerns are identified for a marketed product and all plans must be updated as circumstances change.
Thus companies are required to specify at the time of first marketing areas of safety about which they are currently uncertain and how they will resolve this uncertainty. They must also indicate what measures they will take to reduce known risks and how they will test whether these measures work.
The EU Risk Management Plan (EU-RMP) has 3 main elements. First, a detailed consideration of what is known about the safety of the product, based on pre-clinical and clinical studies. This “safety specification” considers identified risks and potential risks – the latter being areas of uncertainty regarding safety. It also specifies what the limitations of the clinical research program are and what important information about safety is currently missing. In the second component, the “pharmacovigilance plan”, the company must indicate how it proposes to resolve the uncertainties – what extra studies it will carry out after marketing to fill the important gaps in knowledge. The third component is the “risk minimization plan”. This states how the company proposes to reduce the severity or frequency of known adverse reactions. This may involve special communication programs, or educational exercises, or perhaps registration programs for patients, doctors or pharmacists, or other measures. The pharmacovigilance plan and risk minimization plan must include timelines for setting up the programs and milestones for their evaluation.
Laws
There are EU laws – regulations and directives – on the one hand, and national laws on the other. An EU regulation, when it comes into effect, is in force in all the Member States of the European Union. An EU directive, however, must first be enacted in national law in each EU Member State, within a specified time-frame. In addition to those national laws that promulgate the EU directives, there may also be national laws that concern pharmacovigilance.
The principal EU laws concerning pharmacovigilance are:
Guidelines
The EU laws make reference to guidelines drawn up by the European Commission which provide detail and interpretation. These guidelines are not considered to be voluntary – they are mandatory as far as companies are concerned. The guidelines are also directed at regulatory authorities, with detailed requirements for the way that they carry out pharmacovigilance as well. They comprise:
In addition to these laws and regulatory guidelines, there are various voluntary guidelines. These are mostly generated by two organizations:
the Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences (CIOMS)
the International Conference on Harmonization of Technical Requirements for the Registration of Pharmaceuticals (ICH).
CIOMS is a body set up under World Health Organization and UNESCO. It has developed a series of guidelines on pharmacovigilance, drawn up by a committee of volunteers from Industry, regulatory authorities, WHO and others. The main guidelines concern the international reporting form (CIOMS I); periodic safety update reports (CIOMS II); core data sheets (CIOMS III); benefit-risk assessments (CIOMS IV); practical issues in pharmacovigilance (CIOMS V); clinical trial safety data (CIOMS VI); and development safety update reports (CIOMS VII).
Whilst CIOMS guidelines are very influential they are not “official” regulatory guidelines, have no legal force and generally just provide a consensus on good practices and new methodologies.
ICH consists of representatives of the regulatory authorities in the EU, Japan and US, with representatives of the corresponding industry regional organizations and Health Canada and WHO as observers. ICH establishes guidelines applicable to the EU, US and Japan through a series of expert working groups. There is a stepwise development of the guidelines. At Step 4, there is consensus internationally and at Step 5, an agreement by the regulators that they will introduce the guidelines into legislation, although there may be some divergence when these are actually put into effect in the different regions.
The three areas covered by ICH guidelines are Efficacy, Safety and Multidisciplinary. Paradoxically, the “Efficacy” guidelines include clinical (human) safety, whereas the “Safety” guidelines concern only pre-clinical (animal toxicology) safety.
The main guidelines concerning pharmacovigilance are:
| E1: | populations to be studied for safety and efficacy |
| E2A: | reporting on safety in clinical trials |
| E2B: | electronic reporting of adverse events |
| E2C: | periodic safety update reports |
| E2D: | reporting on safety post-marketing |
| E2E: | pharmacovigilance planning |
| E2F: | development safety update reports |
| M1: | Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities |
| M4: | the Common Technical Document (i.e. the international registration dossier) |