The Use of Remote Monitoring Technologies: A Review of Recent Regulatory Scientific Advices, Qualification Opinions, and Qualification Advices Issued by the European Medicines Agency

Aims: Recently, the use of novel remote monitoring technologies (RMTs) in trials has gained much interest. To facilitate regulatory learning, we evaluated qualification opinions (QOs) and advices (QAs) and scientific advices (SAs) of the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) to gain...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Marieke J. H. J. Dekker, Pieter Stolk, Anna M. G. Pasmooij
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Frontiers Media S.A. 2021-07-01
Series:Frontiers in Medicine
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmed.2021.619513/full
id doaj-b50076dba02148bf9c3de580202c72f0
record_format Article
spelling doaj-b50076dba02148bf9c3de580202c72f02021-07-01T15:49:36ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Medicine2296-858X2021-07-01810.3389/fmed.2021.619513619513The Use of Remote Monitoring Technologies: A Review of Recent Regulatory Scientific Advices, Qualification Opinions, and Qualification Advices Issued by the European Medicines AgencyMarieke J. H. J. Dekker0Pieter Stolk1Anna M. G. Pasmooij2Medicines Evaluation Board, Utrecht, NetherlandsLygature, Utrecht, NetherlandsMedicines Evaluation Board, Utrecht, NetherlandsAims: Recently, the use of novel remote monitoring technologies (RMTs) in trials has gained much interest. To facilitate regulatory learning, we evaluated qualification opinions (QOs) and advices (QAs) and scientific advices (SAs) of the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) to gain insight in the types of devices that are intended to be used in clinical trials for supporting/submitting application for obtaining marketing authorization (registration trials) and the main recommendations of the CHMP.Methods: QOs, QAs, and SAs of the CHMP that assessed RMTs between 2013 and 2019 were eligible for our study. The following information was extracted from the documents: year of advice/opinion, device and endpoints used, type of endpoint (primary, secondary, exploratory, or safety), and main recommendations of the CHMP.Results: In total two QOs, four QAs, and 59 SAs were included in our study (total of SAs between 2013 and 2019 = 4,054). In the SAs, accelerometers to measure activity and/or sleep parameters (n = 31) were the most frequently used devices, followed by mobile applications (n = 6) and glucose monitoring devices (n = 6). Usually, these measures were proposed as secondary or exploratory endpoints (n = 32). The main recommendations of the CHMP were related to relevance of the (novel) outcome measure; validation; precision, accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity; compliance; sampling interval; and data handling and privacy.Conclusions: Although there was a trend toward an increased use over time, the use of RMTs in registration trials is still relatively rare. In the absence of formal European regulatory guidance on mHealth technologies, insight in the main recommendations of the CHMP may stimulate the use of novel RMTs in a regulatory context.https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmed.2021.619513/fullremote monitoring devicesEuropean Medicine Agencyscientific advicesqualification advicesqualification opinions
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Marieke J. H. J. Dekker
Pieter Stolk
Anna M. G. Pasmooij
spellingShingle Marieke J. H. J. Dekker
Pieter Stolk
Anna M. G. Pasmooij
The Use of Remote Monitoring Technologies: A Review of Recent Regulatory Scientific Advices, Qualification Opinions, and Qualification Advices Issued by the European Medicines Agency
Frontiers in Medicine
remote monitoring devices
European Medicine Agency
scientific advices
qualification advices
qualification opinions
author_facet Marieke J. H. J. Dekker
Pieter Stolk
Anna M. G. Pasmooij
author_sort Marieke J. H. J. Dekker
title The Use of Remote Monitoring Technologies: A Review of Recent Regulatory Scientific Advices, Qualification Opinions, and Qualification Advices Issued by the European Medicines Agency
title_short The Use of Remote Monitoring Technologies: A Review of Recent Regulatory Scientific Advices, Qualification Opinions, and Qualification Advices Issued by the European Medicines Agency
title_full The Use of Remote Monitoring Technologies: A Review of Recent Regulatory Scientific Advices, Qualification Opinions, and Qualification Advices Issued by the European Medicines Agency
title_fullStr The Use of Remote Monitoring Technologies: A Review of Recent Regulatory Scientific Advices, Qualification Opinions, and Qualification Advices Issued by the European Medicines Agency
title_full_unstemmed The Use of Remote Monitoring Technologies: A Review of Recent Regulatory Scientific Advices, Qualification Opinions, and Qualification Advices Issued by the European Medicines Agency
title_sort use of remote monitoring technologies: a review of recent regulatory scientific advices, qualification opinions, and qualification advices issued by the european medicines agency
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
series Frontiers in Medicine
issn 2296-858X
publishDate 2021-07-01
description Aims: Recently, the use of novel remote monitoring technologies (RMTs) in trials has gained much interest. To facilitate regulatory learning, we evaluated qualification opinions (QOs) and advices (QAs) and scientific advices (SAs) of the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) to gain insight in the types of devices that are intended to be used in clinical trials for supporting/submitting application for obtaining marketing authorization (registration trials) and the main recommendations of the CHMP.Methods: QOs, QAs, and SAs of the CHMP that assessed RMTs between 2013 and 2019 were eligible for our study. The following information was extracted from the documents: year of advice/opinion, device and endpoints used, type of endpoint (primary, secondary, exploratory, or safety), and main recommendations of the CHMP.Results: In total two QOs, four QAs, and 59 SAs were included in our study (total of SAs between 2013 and 2019 = 4,054). In the SAs, accelerometers to measure activity and/or sleep parameters (n = 31) were the most frequently used devices, followed by mobile applications (n = 6) and glucose monitoring devices (n = 6). Usually, these measures were proposed as secondary or exploratory endpoints (n = 32). The main recommendations of the CHMP were related to relevance of the (novel) outcome measure; validation; precision, accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity; compliance; sampling interval; and data handling and privacy.Conclusions: Although there was a trend toward an increased use over time, the use of RMTs in registration trials is still relatively rare. In the absence of formal European regulatory guidance on mHealth technologies, insight in the main recommendations of the CHMP may stimulate the use of novel RMTs in a regulatory context.
topic remote monitoring devices
European Medicine Agency
scientific advices
qualification advices
qualification opinions
url https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmed.2021.619513/full
work_keys_str_mv AT mariekejhjdekker theuseofremotemonitoringtechnologiesareviewofrecentregulatoryscientificadvicesqualificationopinionsandqualificationadvicesissuedbytheeuropeanmedicinesagency
AT pieterstolk theuseofremotemonitoringtechnologiesareviewofrecentregulatoryscientificadvicesqualificationopinionsandqualificationadvicesissuedbytheeuropeanmedicinesagency
AT annamgpasmooij theuseofremotemonitoringtechnologiesareviewofrecentregulatoryscientificadvicesqualificationopinionsandqualificationadvicesissuedbytheeuropeanmedicinesagency
AT mariekejhjdekker useofremotemonitoringtechnologiesareviewofrecentregulatoryscientificadvicesqualificationopinionsandqualificationadvicesissuedbytheeuropeanmedicinesagency
AT pieterstolk useofremotemonitoringtechnologiesareviewofrecentregulatoryscientificadvicesqualificationopinionsandqualificationadvicesissuedbytheeuropeanmedicinesagency
AT annamgpasmooij useofremotemonitoringtechnologiesareviewofrecentregulatoryscientificadvicesqualificationopinionsandqualificationadvicesissuedbytheeuropeanmedicinesagency
_version_ 1721346746978664448