This article has been reviewed according to Science X's editorial process and policies. Editors have highlighted the following attributes while ensuring the content's credibility:


trusted source


Clinical trials: Two arms are better than one

medical trial
Credit: Unsplash/CC0 Public Domain

The German Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG) has responded critically to a reflection paper by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) on the approval of new drugs based on single-arm studies.

The EMA correctly points out that studies without a control arm are subject to bias and that, in general, it is hardly possible to estimate causal effects from them. However, it does not provide clear criteria for limiting based on such studies to extremely rare exceptional cases.

The FDA shows how to do it

There is also no recommendation on external controls—in contrast to guidance published in February by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

Beate Wieseler, Head of IQWiG's Drug Assessment Department notes: "The FDA clearly states that the likelihood of demonstrating the effectiveness of a drug with an external control is low, and strongly recommends a with an internal control—also for rare diseases."

"In addition, the FDA designates specific situations where externally controlled studies are generally not suitable, for example when the natural history of the disease is not well known or the disease course is variable. The EMA should include these points in its reflection paper."

Accelerated approval is not an end in itself

The situation is well known: in rare cases, single-arm studies can demonstrate the safety and efficacy of a new drug well enough to gain regulatory approval. But when it comes to its actual use in a system, the drug needs to be compared with existing treatment options—and this should happen as quickly as possible.

Beate Wieseler explains, "By publicly reflecting on the opportunities and limitations of single-arm studies for approval, without describing consequences of their drawbacks, the EMA is doing a disservice to both and patients. Drug development is efficient when new drugs can be used immediately and appropriately in health care."

"To achieve this, studies should be conducted from the outset that are suitable both for approval and for integration into the health care landscape through health technology assessment (HTA). This is not about accelerating market access for new drugs per se, but about accelerating their evidence-based introduction into the —for the benefit of patients."

More information: Full comment: … ents/2023-09-21.html

Citation: Clinical trials: Two arms are better than one (2023, October 6) retrieved 1 March 2024 from
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.

Explore further

Supplemental indications in drug approval: Often no proof of added value, says researcher


Feedback to editors