ReviewClinical pharmacology and therapeutics2025
Evolving Real-World Data and Evidence Use for New Drugs and Regenerative Medical Products Approvals in Japan-An Analysis of the 6-Year Trend.
Review in Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Several regulatory initiatives have been made to clarify the acceptability and requirements of real-world data and real-world evidence (RWD/E) for the benefit/risk assessment of new medical products in Japan. The objectives of this review were to characterize the use of RWD/E in regulatory applications of new medical products and to describe the longitudinal trends of how use cases evolved in conjunction with regulatory initiatives in the most recent 6 years in Japan. New drugs and regenerative medical products applications approved by the Ministry of Labour, Health, and Welfare between January 1, 2019, and December 31, 2024, were included (N = 674). Of these, 158 (23.4%) applications contained RWD/E. The number of RWD/E use cases increased continuously over the period from 21 (18.1%) of applications in 2019 to 38 (30.4%) of applications in 2024. 75% of use cases categorized as the main study were used to provide comparator arms in clinical trials. Most of the cases were employed because a randomized controlled trial was ethically difficult or infeasible. In pediatric drug applications, RWD/E were leveraged to address the low feasibility of clinical trials and ethical concerns, with a relatively higher use for safety purposes (40%) observed. Alongside the development of regulatory initiatives, the findings confirm the increasing number and variety of RWD/E utilization. The requirements for the regulatory use of RWD/E differ based on its purposes and context. Insights from accumulated cases may help clarify regulatory requirements and deepen our understanding of the value of RWD/E use in developing new medicines.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.