Skip to content
Review Open access

Recommendations for generating real-world evidence with regulatory-grade relevance and reliability

Aug 2026 · International Journal of Clinical Oncology · Vol 31, pp. 2075 - 2086 · 0 citations · 28 references
Medicine

TL;DR

A purpose-oriented framework clarifying the levels of relevance and reliability required according to specific regulatory objectives is proposed, and practical recommendations for generating regulatory-grade RWE that meaningfully informs regulatory decision-making while complementing conventional clinical trials are provided.

Abstract

Real-world data (RWD) and real-world evidence (RWE) are increasingly incorporated into regulatory decision-making to complement randomized controlled trials (RCTs), particularly in settings where conventional trial designs are infeasible, such as rare diseases, rare molecular subtypes, and post-marketing evaluation. Across regulatory authorities, the use of RWD/RWE is consistently framed by the fit-for-purpose principle, centered on two foundational concepts: relevance and reliability. However, the absence of operational guidance has created uncertainty regarding how academic registries and healthcare databases can be designed or upgraded to meet regulatory expectations. Drawing on practical experience with disease registries in Japan and their regulatory applications, this review proposes a purpose-oriented framework clarifying the levels of relevance and reliability required according to specific regulatory objectives. We categorize considerations into three use cases: (1) drug development for rare diseases and rare molecular subtypes; (2) Pharmacovigilance; and (3) evidence generation for clinical questions that cannot be sufficiently evaluated through randomized controlled trials (RCTs). For each category, we outline essential requirements related to study design, data elements, quality management, governance, statistical planning, and operational feasibility. We further compare regulatory expectations across the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the European Medicines Agency (EMA), the Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency (PMDA), and the International Council for Harmonisation (ICH). While international convergence is evident at the level of principles, operational thresholds and implementation frameworks differ. By articulating relevance and reliability as a shared regulatory language and emphasizing purpose-driven design and early regulatory engagement, this review provides practical recommendations for generating regulatory-grade RWE that meaningfully informs regulatory decision-making while complementing conventional clinical trials.

Read PDF

Similar papers

Open access Sep 2026

A Practical Guide to Implementing Real‐World Evidence as Primary Basis for Approval and Label Expansion

In June 2026, the FDA issued a revised draft guidance describing the circumstances in which one adequate and well‐controlled clinical investigation plus confirmatory evidence may satisfy the statutory substantial evidence standard for establishing efficacy and safety. Confirmatory evidence includes real‐world evidence...

T. Mayne, M. A. Brookhart, Nancy A. Dreyer · 0 citations
Review Open access Aug 2026

Linking clinical trial data with real-world data for enhanced clinical evidence generation: methodological considerations and recommendations

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) remain the cornerstone of causal inference on the safety and efficacy of medicinal products. But their limited follow-up, controlled settings, and narrowly defined data collection to balance the burden to patients and maintain study feasibility often results in unaddressed important...

A. Meinecke, J. Diaz-Decaro, Kathleen M. Gavin et al. · 1 citation
Review Open access Sep 2026

Decision Framework for Prioritizing Systematic Reviews Versus Primary/translational Research in Low- and Middle-income Countries

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses (SR/MAs) are widely regarded as the highest level of evidence and play a crucial role in informing clinical practice, public health policy, and guideline development. However, the rapid proliferation of evidence syntheses has raised concerns regarding research redundancy, publicatio...

Sudip Bhattacharya, Abha Kumari, Vanishree Ramanathan et al. · 0 citations
Open access Aug 2026

reFLASH: A proof-of-concept meta-analytic framework to validate surrogate endpoints in the absence of randomized clinical trial data.

BACKGROUND Within a meta-analytic framework, validating surrogate endpoints traditionally requires individual patient data (IPD) from multiple randomized controlled trials (RCTs). This is rarely feasible in rare and indolent diseases. We propose a proof-of-concept strategy that creates synthetic comparative evidence fr...

C. Bommier, J. Dixon, M. Maurer et al. · 0 citations

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.