This paper delineates the purposes of clinical studies performed with marketed drugs, often called “Phase IV” or “postregistration” trials. The purposes of these trials are outlined, some design issues specific to them are discussed, and the appropriateness of a full implementation of good clinical practice standards in the postregistration setting is questioned.
CPMP/ICH/135/95. European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products Human Medicines Evaluation Units. Effective January 17, 1997.
2.
Japan's New GCP and other Rules on Clinical Trials.Japanese Technical Requirements for New Drug Registration 1997.Yakuji Nippo, Ltd.; 1997.
3.
WHO guidelines for good clinical practice (GCP) for trials on pharmaceutical products. Geneva: World Health Organization; Feb 1, 1994.
4.
21 CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) parts 50, 56, 312, 214, National Archives and Records Administration. Revised as of April 1, 1997.
5.
SpilkerB.Marketing studies. Drug News Perspect. 1990;3(6):369–371.
6.
WittePUPostmarketing observational studies and phase IV trials in Germany. Appl Clin Trials. 1993;2(7):54–60.
7.
VenuletJ.Potential role of postmarketing research. Drug Exptl Clin Res.1987;XIII:673–683.
8.
ToscaniMRResnickG.Postmarketing studies: methods for implementation and potential use of data. Drug Inf J.1992;26:261–265.
9.
BellRLSmithO'Brian E.Clinical trial in postmarketing surveillance of drugs. Contr Clin Trials. 1982;3:61–68.
10.
EdlavitchSAPostmarketing surveillance methodologies. Drug Intel Clin Pharm. 1988;22:68–78.
11.
EllenbergSSFinkelsteinDMSchoenfeldDAStatistical issues arising in AIDS clinical trials. J Am Stat Assoc. 1992;87:562–569.
12.
CocchettoDMJonesDRFaster access to drugs for serious or life-threatening illnesses through use of the accelerated approval regulation in the United States. Drug Inf J.1998;32:27–35.
13.
HakkaraienHHattabJRVenuletJ.Phase IV research by pharmaceutical companies. Pharmacopsychiat. 1984;17:168–176.
14.
RayWAGriffinMRAvornI.Evaluating drugs after their approval for clinical use. N Engl J Med.1993;329:2029–2032.
15.
WengerKass NWhy community physicians should encourage their patients to participate in randomized clinical trials. Circulation. 1978;58:963–964.
16.
ISIS-2 (Second International Study of Infarct Survival) Collaborative Group.Randomized trial of intravenous streptokinase, oral aspirin, both, or neither among 17,187 cases of suspected acute myocardial infarction. Lancet. 1988;II:349–360.
17.
YusufSCollinsRPetoRIntravenous and intracoronary fubrinolytic therapy in acute myocardial infarction: overview of results on mortality, re-infarction and side-effects from 33 randomized controlled trials. Eur Heart J.1985;6:556–585.
18.
GISSI (Gruppo Italiano per la Studio dela Streptochinasi Nell-Infarcto Miocardico).Effectiveness of intravenous thrombolytic treatment in acute myocardial infarction. Lancet. 1986;II:397–401.
19.
RoyalRMEthics and statistics in randomized clinical trials (with discussion). Stat Sci.1991;6:52–88.
20.
AntmanEMLauJKupelnickBA comparison of results of meta-analysis of randomized control trials and recommendations of clinical experts. JAMA. 1992;268:240–248.
21.
BuyseMPoplavskyJLClinical evaluation of virus safety and inhibitor incidence: statistical considerations. Blood Coagul Fibrinol. 1995;6(Suppl. 2): S86–S92.
22.
WaldronHACooksonRFAvoiding the pitfalls of sponsored multicentre research in general practice. Br Med J.1993;307:1351–1354.
23.
BuyseM.Potential and pitfalls of randomized clinical trials in cancer research. Cancer Surveys. 1989;8:91–105.
24.
StromBLMiettinenOSMelmonKLPostmarketing studies of drug efficacy: when must they be randomized?Clin Pharmacol Ther. 1983;34:1–7.
25.
ByarDPSchoenfeldDAGreenSBDesign considerations for AIDS trials. N Engl J Med.1990;323:1343–1348.
26.
TognoniGAlliCAvanziniFRandomised clinical trials in general practice: lessons from a failure. Br Med J.1991;303:969–971.
27.
LamasGAPfefferMAHammPDo the results of randomized clinical trials of cardiovascular drugs influence medical practice?N Engl J Med.1992;327:241–247.
28.
BoisselJPImpact of randomized clinical trials on medical practice. Contr Clin Trials. 1989;4:120S–134S.
29.
PetoRCollinsRGrayR.Large-scale randomized evidence: Large, simple trials and overview of trials. J Clin Epidemiol. 1995;48:23–40.
30.
BuyseM.The case for loose inclusion criteria in clinical trials. Acta Chir Belg. 1990;90:129–131.
31.
YusufSHeldPTeoKKToretskyERSelection of patients for randomized controlled trials: implications of wide or narrow eligibility criteria. Stat Med.1990;9:73–86.
32.
StenningS.The “uncertainty Principle” selection of patients for cancer clinical trials. In: Introducing new treatments for cancer. WilliamsCJ, ed. New York: John Wiley; 1992.
33.
TempleR.Government viewpoint of clinical trials of cardiovascular drugs. Med Clinics N Am.1989;73:495–509.
34.
FlemingTRTreatment evaluation in active control studies. Cancer Treat Rep.1987;71:1061–1065.
35.
MakuchRWPledgerGHallDGActive control equivalence studies. In: Statistical Issues in Drug Research and Development. PearceKE, ed. New York: Marcel Dekker; 1992.
36.
ICH Harmonised Tripartite Guideline for Good Clinical Practice. Brookwood Medical Publications; 1996.
37.
BrownL.Implementation of ICH GCP. GCP J.1998;5: 11–14.
38.
BuyseM.Regulatory vs public health requirements in clinical trials. Drug Inf J.1993;27:977–984.
ISIS-3 (Second internal study of infarct survival) Collaborative group.ISIS-3: a randomized comparison of streptokinase vs tissue plasminogen activator vs anitreplase and of aspirin plus heparin vs aspirin alone among 41,299 cases of suspected acute myocardial infarction. Lancet. 1992;339:753–770.
41.
CPMP Working Party on Pharmacovigilance.Draft guideline for marketing authorization holders on company-sponsored post-marketing safety studies. III/3176/93, 1993.
