References of "Abadie, Eric"
     in
Bookmark and Share    
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailRecommendations for an update of 2003 European regulatory requirements for registration of drugs to be used in the treatment of RA.
Smolen, Josef S.; Boers, Maarten; Abadie, Eric ULg et al

in Current Medical Research & Opinion (2011), 27(2), 315-25

Since 2003, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) document, 'Points to consider on clinical investigation of medicinal products other than NSAIDs (nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs) for the treatment of ... [more ▼]

Since 2003, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) document, 'Points to consider on clinical investigation of medicinal products other than NSAIDs (nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs) for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis' has provided guidance for the clinical development of both biologic and non-biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). In the last few years, several new products have been developed or are in development for the treatment of RA, which offer significant efficacy with regard to disease control, including prevention of structural damage and disability. Concurrently, novel insights have been gained with respect to the assessment of disease activity, joint damage and disability. New treatment strategies have been established which relate to early therapy, tight control and rapid switching of medication. Accordingly, several new EULAR/ACR recommendations have been or are being developed. Several important additions and changes are needed in the 2003 guidance to incorporate the current scientific knowledge into clinical trial design for the development of future products. Under the auspices of the Group for the Respect of Ethics and Excellence in Science (GREES), a group of experts in the field of RA and clinical trial design met to provide a consensus recommendation for an update to the 2003 EMA guidance document. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 55 (7 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailUpdating the 2003 European regulatory requirements for registering disease-modifying drugs to be used in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis.
Smolen, Josef S.; Boers, Maarten; Abadie, Eric ULg et al

in Rheumatology (2011), 50(10), 1732-6

Detailed reference viewed: 28 (13 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailBiomarkers and personalised medicine in rheumatoid arthritis: a proposal for interactions between academia, industry and regulatory bodies.
Miossec, P.; Verweij, C. L.; Klareskog, L. et al

in Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases (2011), 70(10), 1713-8

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is one of the most appropriate conditions for the application of personalised medicine as a high degree of heterogeneity has been recognised, which remains to be explained. Such ... [more ▼]

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is one of the most appropriate conditions for the application of personalised medicine as a high degree of heterogeneity has been recognised, which remains to be explained. Such heterogeneity is also reflected in the large number of treatment targets and options. A growing number of biologics as well as small molecules are already in use and there are promising new drugs in development. In order to make the best use of treatment options, both targeted and non-targeted biomarkers have to be identified and validated. To this aim, new rules are needed for the interaction between academia and industry under regulatory control. Setting up multi-centre biosample collections with clear definition of access, organising early, possibly non-committing discussions with regulatory authorities, and defining a clear route for the validation, qualification and registration of the biomarker-drug combination are some of the more critical areas where effective collaboration between the drug industry, academia and regulators is needed. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 66 (15 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailEuropean regulatory perspectives for innovative therapies.
Ormarsdottir, S.; Reginster, Jean-Yves ULg; Abadie, Eric ULg

in Osteoporosis International (2008), 19(6), 725-31

The current regulatory requirements offer accelerated assessment of innovative therapies in Europe. Future perspectives include the need for increased interaction between stakeholders in pharmaceutical ... [more ▼]

The current regulatory requirements offer accelerated assessment of innovative therapies in Europe. Future perspectives include the need for increased interaction between stakeholders in pharmaceutical development. Development of new, high quality, effective and safe medicines in Europe is the common goal of academia, pharmaceutical industry and regulatory authorities. To achieve this, it is important that regulatory requirements do not hinder innovation and vice versa, innovation cannot be allowed to proceed without concerns for public health. Interaction between stakeholders in pharmaceutical development is of the utmost importance. A dialogue has begun and in the future it will be the responsibility of all stakeholders to ensure continuous exchanges in an environment that is characterised by new scientific advances and global development programmes. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 25 (7 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailClinical evaluation of medicinal products for acceleration of fracture healing in patients with osteoporosis.
Goldhahn, Jörg; Scheele, Wim H.; Mitlak, Bruce H. et al

in BONE (2008), 43(2), 343-7

Pre-clinical studies indicate that pharmacologic agents can augment fracture union. If these pharmacologic approaches could be translated into clinical benefit and offered to patients with osteoporosis or ... [more ▼]

Pre-clinical studies indicate that pharmacologic agents can augment fracture union. If these pharmacologic approaches could be translated into clinical benefit and offered to patients with osteoporosis or patients with other risks for impaired fracture union (e.g. in subjects with large defects or open fractures with high complication rate), they could provide an important adjunct to the treatment of fractures. However, widely accepted guidelines are important to encourage the conduct of studies to evaluate bioactive substances, drugs, and new agents that may promote fracture union and subsequent return to normal function. A consensus process was initiated to provide recommendations for the clinical evaluation of potential therapies to augment fracture repair in patients with meta- and diaphyseal fractures. Based on the characteristics of fracture healing and fixation, the following study objectives of a clinical study may be appropriate: a) acceleration of fracture union, b) acceleration of return to normal function and c) reduction of fracture healing complications. The intended goal(s) should determine subsequent study methodology. While an acceleration of return to normal function or a reduction of fracture healing complications in and of themselves may be sufficient primary study endpoints for a phase 3 pivotal study, acceleration of fracture union alone is not. Radiographic evaluation may either occur at multiple time points during the healing process with the aim of measuring the time taken to reach a defined status (e.g. cortical bridging of three cortices or disappearance of fracture lines), or could be obtained at a single pre-determined timepoint, were patients are expected to reach a common clinical milestone (i.e. pain free full weight-bearing in weight-bearing fracture cases). Validated Patient Reported Outcomes (PRO's) measures will need to support the return to normal function co-primary endpoints. If reduction of complication rate (e.g. non-union) is the primary objective, the anticipated complications must be defined in the study protocol, along with their possible associations with the specified fracture type and fixation device. The study design should be randomized, parallel, double-blind, and placebo-controlled, and all fracture subjects should receive a standardized method of fracture fixation, defined as Standard of Care. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 36 (13 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailRecommendations for an update of the current (2001) regulatory requirements for registration of drugs to be used in the treatment of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women and in men
Reginster, Jean-Yves ULg; Abadie, Eric ULg; Delmas, P. et al

in Osteoporosis International (2006), 17(1), 1-7

Recent advances in the understanding of the epidemiology of osteoporosis suggest that certain parts of the current European guidelines for the registration of drugs in osteoporosis might be no longer ... [more ▼]

Recent advances in the understanding of the epidemiology of osteoporosis suggest that certain parts of the current European guidelines for the registration of drugs in osteoporosis might be no longer substantiated. The object of this review is to provide the European regulatory authorities with an evidence-based working document providing suggestions for the revision of the "Note for guidance for the approval of drugs to be used in postmenopausal osteoporosis" (CPMP/EWP/552/95). Following an extensive review of the literature (1990-2004), the Group for the Respect of Ethics and Excellence in Science (GREES) organized a workshop including European regulators, academic scientists and representatives of the pharmaceutical industry. The outcomes of this meeting reflect the personal views of those who attended and should not, in any case, be seen as an official position paper of any regulatory agency. The group identified a certain number of points that deserve discussion. They mainly relate to the nature of the indication being granted to new chemical entities (treatment of osteoporosis in women at high risk of fracture instead of prevention and treatment of osteoporosis), the requirements of showing an anti-fracture efficacy on all or on major nonvertebral fractures (instead of the hip), the duration of pivotal trials (2 years instead of 3) and the possibility of considering bridging studies for new routes of administration, new doses or new regimens of previously approved drugs. The group also recommends that an indication could be granted for the treatment of osteoporosis in males on the basis of a placebo-controlled study, with bone mineral density changes after 1 year as the primary endpoint, for medications approved in the treatment of osteoporosis in women at high risk of fractures. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 28 (8 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailTotal joint replacement of hip or knee as an outcome measure for structure modifying trials in osteoarthritis
Altman, R. D.; Abadie, Eric ULg; Avouac, B. et al

in Osteoporosis International (2005, March), 16(Suppl.3), 10

Detailed reference viewed: 32 (2 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailRecommendations for the registration of agents used in the prevention and treatment of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis: updated recommendations from GREES
Abadie, Eric ULg; Devogealer, Jean-Pierre; Ringe, J. et al

in Osteoporosis International (2005, March), 16(Suppl.3), 47

Detailed reference viewed: 14 (1 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailTotal joint replacement of hip or knee as an outcome measure for structure modifying trials in osteoarthritis
Altman, R. D.; Abadie, Eric ULg; Avouac, B. et al

in Osteoarthritis and Cartilage (2005), 13(1), 13-19

Objective: The Group for the Respect of Ethics and Excellence in Science (GREES) organized a working group to assess the value of time to joint surgery as a potential therapeutic failure outcome criterion ... [more ▼]

Objective: The Group for the Respect of Ethics and Excellence in Science (GREES) organized a working group to assess the value of time to joint surgery as a potential therapeutic failure outcome criterion for osteoarthritis (OA) of the hip or knee in the assessment of potential structure modifying agents. Methods: PubMed was searched for manuscripts from 1976 to 2004. Relevant studies were discussed at a 1-day meeting. Results: There are no accepted guidelines for 'time to' and 'indications for' joint replacement surgery. A limited number of trials have examined joint replacement surgery within the study population. Several parameters, particularly joint space narrowing (interbone distance), correlate with surgical intervention. However, at the level of the knee, none of the parameters have positive predictive value for joint replacement surgery better than 30%. In contrast, lack of significant joint space narrowing has a strong negative predictive value for joint replacement surgery (> 90%), that remains after controlling for OA pain severity. Conclusion: At this time, GREES cannot recommend time to joint surgery as a primary endpoint of failure for structure modifying trials of hip or knee OA-as the parameter has sensitivity but lacks specificity. In contrast, in existing trials, a lack of progression of joint space narrowing has predictive value of > 90% for not having surgery. GREES suggests utilizing joint space narrowing (e.g., > 0.3-0.7 mm) combined with a lack of clinically relevant improvement in symptoms (e.g., greater than or equal to 20-25%) for 'failure' of a secondary outcome in structure modifying trials of the hip and knee. (C) 2004 OsteoArthritis Research Society International. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 68 (10 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailRecommendations for the registration of agents to be used in the prevention and treatment of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis: updated recommendations from the Group for the Respect of Ethics and Excellence in Science.
Abadie, Eric ULg; Devogelaer, Jean-Pierre; Ringe, Johann D. et al

in Seminars in Arthritis & Rheumatism (2005), 35(1), 1-4

OBJECTIVES: The Group for the Respect and Excellence in Science (GREES) has reviewed and updated their recommendations for clinical trials to evaluate the efficacy and safety of new chemical entities to ... [more ▼]

OBJECTIVES: The Group for the Respect and Excellence in Science (GREES) has reviewed and updated their recommendations for clinical trials to evaluate the efficacy and safety of new chemical entities to be used in the treatment and prevention of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis (GIOP). METHODS: Consensus discussion of the committee. RESULTS: With the exception of steroid use posttransplantation, there is no need to differentiate between underlying diseases. Prevention and treatment for GIOP are dependent on exposure to glucocorticoids rather than T-scores as in postmenopausal osteoporosis (PMO). If fracture data are obtained for PMO, it need not be repeated for GIOP, relying instead on bone mineral density (BMD) trials of at least 1 year. GREES recommends several changes in the previous guidance for GIOP. The committee saw no need to repeat preclinical studies if those have been previously done to assure bone quality in PMO. Similarly, phase I and phase II trials, if careful dose selection has been done for PMO, should not be repeated. The "prevention" and "treatment" claims should remain. Since the most recent evidence suggests significant increase in fracture risk for daily doses of prednisone of 5 mg/day or equivalent, clinical trials should concentrate on patients receiving at least this daily dosage. The emergence of bisphosphonates as the reference treatment, together with the rapid bone loss and high fracture incidence in glucocorticoid users, necessitates recommending a noninferiority trial design with lumbar spine BMD as the primary endpoint after 1 year. CONCLUSIONS: Registration of new chemical entities to be used in the management of GIOP should be granted, based on a 1-year noninferiority trial, using BMD as primary outcome and alendronate or risedronate as comparator. Demonstration of antifracture efficacy should have been previously demonstrated in PMO. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 69 (5 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailRecommendations for the use of new methods to assess the efficacy of disease-modifying drugs in the treatment of osteoarthritis
Abadie, Eric ULg; Ethgen, Dominique ULg; Avouac, Bernard ULg et al

in Osteoarthritis and Cartilage (2004), 12(4), 263-268

Background: Recent innovations in the pharmaceutical drug discovery environment have generated new chemical entities with the potential to become disease modifying drugs for osteoarthritis (DMOAD's ... [more ▼]

Background: Recent innovations in the pharmaceutical drug discovery environment have generated new chemical entities with the potential to become disease modifying drugs for osteoarthritis (DMOAD's). Regulatory agencies acknowledge that such compounds may be granted a DMOAD indication, providing they demonstrate that they can slow down disease progression; progression would be calibrated by a surrogate for structural change, by measuring joint space narrowing (JSN) on plain X-rays with the caveat that this delayed JSN translate into a clinical benefit for the patient. Recently, new technology has been developed to detect a structural change of the OA joint earlier than conventional X-rays. Objective: The Group for the Respect of Ethics and Excellence in Science (GREES) organized a working party to assess whether these new technologies may be used as surrogates to plain x-rays for assessment of DMOADs. Methods: GREES includes academic scientists, members of regulatory authorities and representatives from the pharmaceutical industry. After an extensive search of the international literature, from 1980 to 2002, two experts meetings were organized to prepare a resource document for regulatory authorities. This document includes recommendations for a possible update of guidelines for the registration of new chemical entities in osteoarthritis. Results: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is now used to measure parameters of cartilage morphology and integrity in OA patients. While some data are encouraging, correlation between short-term changes in cartilage structure observed with MRI and long-term radiographic or clinical changes are needed. Hence, the GREES suggests that MRI maybe used as an outcome in phase II studies, but that further data is needed before accepting MRI as a primary end-point in phase III clinical trials. Biochemical markers of bone and cartilage remodelling are being tested to predict OA and measure disease progression. Recently published data are promising but validation as surrogate end-points for OA disease progression requires additional study. The GREES suggests that biochemical markers remain limited to 'proof of concept' studies or as secondary end-points in phase II and III clinical trials. However, the GREES emphasizes the importance of acquiring additional information on biochemical markers in order to help better understand the mode of action of drugs to be used in OA. Regulatory agencies consider that evidence of improvement in clinical outcomes is critical for approval of DMOAD. Time to total joint replacement surgery is probably the most relevant clinical end-point for the evaluation of efficacy of a DMOAD. However, at this time, time to surgery can not be used in clinical trials because of bias by non disease-related factors like patient willingness for surgery or economic factors. At this stage, it appears that DMOAD should demonstrate a significant difference compared to placebo. Benefit should be measured by 3 co-primary end-points: JSN, pain and function. Secondary end-points should include the percentage of patients who are 'responder' (or 'failure'). The definition of a 'failure' patient would be someone with progression of JSN>0.5 mm over a period of 2-3 years or who has a significant worsening in pain and/or function, based on validated cut-off values. The definition of the clinically relevant cut-off points for pain and function must be based on data evaluating the natural history of the disease (epidemiological cohorts or placebo groups from long-term studies). These cut-offs points should reflect a high propensity, for an individual patient, to later require joint replacement. Conclusion: GREES has outlined a set of guidelines for the development of a DMOAD for OA. Although these guidelines are subject to change as new information becomes available, the information above is based on the present knowledge in the field with the addition of expert opinion. (C) 2004 OsteoArthritis Research Society International. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 80 (13 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailDo new methods of investigation allow faster assessment of drugs efficacy in osteoarthritis?
Abadie, Eric ULg; Avouac, B.; Bouvenot, G. et al

in Osteoporosis International (2003, November), 14(Suppl. 7), 2

Detailed reference viewed: 16 (2 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailGuidelines for clinical studies assessing the efficacy of drugs for the management of acute low back pain
Devogelaer, J. P.; Dreiser, R. L.; Abadie, Eric ULg et al

in Clinical and Experimental Rheumatology (2003), 21(6, NOV-DEC), 691-694

In this paper we propose guidelines for clinical trials aimed at assessing the efficacy of drugs for acute non-specific low back pain (LBP) with or without radicular pain, preliminary to their approval ... [more ▼]

In this paper we propose guidelines for clinical trials aimed at assessing the efficacy of drugs for acute non-specific low back pain (LBP) with or without radicular pain, preliminary to their approval and registration. To this end, consensus statements were obtained from a group of experts in the fields of rheumatology, clinical medicine, public health and epidemiology. EBM resources were systematically used as references. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 20 (3 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailThe use of placebo-controlled and non-inferiority trials for the evaluation of new drugs in the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis
Delmas, P. D.; Calvo, Gisèle ULg; Boers, M. et al

in Osteoporosis International (2002), 13(1), 1-5

Registration of new agents for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis has been based over the past few years on placebo-controlled phase III trials with the incidence of patients with new vertebral ... [more ▼]

Registration of new agents for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis has been based over the past few years on placebo-controlled phase III trials with the incidence of patients with new vertebral/nonvertebral fractures as the most usual primary endpoint. The use of a placebo in diseases where an active treatment is available has been a matter of debate following the update of the Declaration of Helsinki by the World Medical Association which questioned this trial design. Current regulatory recommendations within the European Union suggest that placebo-controlled trials are still the best option when assessing the efficacy and safety of new drugs intended for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. This suggestion seems to be in apparent contradiction with the current content of the Declaration of Helsinki. This paper addresses the ethics and feasibility of placebo-controlled trials in the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis, in the light of available therapeutic options, and discusses possible alternative approaches in those patients where placebo treatment could be deemed to be unethical. It is concluded that placebo-controlled trials remain the most efficient design to establish the efficacy and safety of a new agent for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. Such trials are feasible and ethically acceptable in patients with osteoporosis but without prevalent vertebral fractures. Conversely, in patients with prevalent vertebral fractures, placebo-controlled trials are ethically questionable and non-inferiority trials are more appropriate. A relative margin of non inferiority of 20-30% is suggested, to be discussed on a case by case basis. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 39 (3 ULg)
Full Text
Peer Reviewed
See detailBackground for studies on the treatment of male osteoporosis: state of the art.
Kaufman, J M; Johnell, O; Abadie, Eric ULg et al

in Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases (2000), 59(10), 765-72

Male osteoporosis represents an important, although long underestimated, public health problem. Both in men and in women aging is accompanied by continuous bone loss and by an exponential increase in the ... [more ▼]

Male osteoporosis represents an important, although long underestimated, public health problem. Both in men and in women aging is accompanied by continuous bone loss and by an exponential increase in the incidence of osteoporotic fracture, with a female to male incidence ratio of about 2 to 3 to 1 in the elderly for hip and vertebral fractures. Morbidity after osteoporotic fractures appears to be more serious and mortality more common in men than in women. To date, no single treatment has been proved to be effective and safe in published prospective studies. The present report, based on a systematic search of the literature on male osteoporosis, summarises the state of the art on the clinical consequences of male osteoporosis and its risk factors, in relation to the present state of knowledge about female osteoporosis. This constitutes the background for the design of rational clinical development strategies for therapeutic interventions in male osteoporosis. From this review of the literature it is apparent that notwithstanding the existing sex differences in pathophysiology of osteoporosis and the difference in age-specific incidence of osteoporotic fractures, there are also important similarities between osteoporosis in women and men. The higher incidence of fracture in women than in men results from quantitative differences in risk factors rather than from different risk factors. Even though there are sex differences in bone geometry, incidence of fracture seems to be similar in men and women for a same absolute areal bone mineral density. However, the lack of data on the changes in fracture rates in men resulting from pharmacological intervention, leading to changes in bone mineral density or bone turnover, remains the main limitation for extrapolation of established treatment outcomes from women to men. [less ▲]

Detailed reference viewed: 33 (4 ULg)