The European Medicines Agency’s (EMA) Good Pharmacovigilance Practices (GVPs) provide a framework for the monitoring and reporting of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) to ensure the safety and efficacy of medicines. In the context of real-world evidence, GVPs play an important role in ensuring the quality and reliability of data collected from real-world studies.
Real-world evidence refers to data collected from sources outside of traditional clinical trials, such as electronic health records, patient registries, and observational studies. This type of data is becoming increasingly important in drug development and regulatory decision-making, as it provides valuable insights into how medicines perform in real-world settings.
To ensure the quality and reliability of real-world evidence, GVPs require that data collection methods are standardized and that the data is collected in a manner that minimizes bias and confounding factors. GVPs also require that adverse events are reported in a timely and accurate manner, and that data is regularly monitored for safety signals.
In addition, GVPs require that all stakeholders involved in the collection and use of real-world evidence are trained (as appropriate) in pharmacovigilance principles and are aware of their responsibilities in ensuring the safety and efficacy of medicines.
By adhering to GVPs in the context of real-world evidence, researchers and regulatory agencies can ensure that the data collected is of high quality and can be used to inform decision-making related to the safety and efficacy of (approved) medicines.
Share this story...
Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – HIPAA
RWE 101 - HIPAA HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act), enacted in 1996, is a federal law in the United States that establishes regulations for the protection of [...]
Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – The Common Rule
RWE 101 - The Common Rule The Common Rule plays a significant role in the governance of observational studies. The Common Rule refers to a set of regulations and [...]
Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – The Tuskegee Syphilis Study (the reason we have the Belmont Report and the Common Rule)
RWE 101 - The Tuskegee Syphilis Study (the reason we have the Belmont Report and the Common Rule) The Tuskegee Syphilis Study, conducted from 1932 to 1972, stands as [...]
Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – Observational Study vs Non-Interventional Study
RWE 101 - Observational Study vs Non-Interventional Study In the context of real-world evidence (RWE), the terms "observational study" and "non-interventional study" are often used interchangeably to refer to [...]
Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – Are Non-Interventional Studies Regulated?
RWE 101 - Are Non-Interventional Studies Regulated? Yes, non-interventional studies (NIS) are regulated. While the specific regulations and requirements may vary by country, there are generally guidelines and provisions [...]
Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – Postmarket Requirements (PMR) vs Post-Authorisation Safety Studies (PASS)
RWE 101 - Postmarket Requirements (PMR) vs Post-Authorisation Safety Studies (PASS) In the context of real-world evidence (RWE) and regulatory frameworks, postmarket requirements (PMRs) and post-authorization safety studies (PASS) [...]







