Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 18, 2026

A Clinical Trial Assessing the Safety, Efficacy, and Delivery of Olive-Oil-Based Three-Chamber Bags for Parenteral Nutrition
Published on: September 20, 2019
Novel trial designs for monotherapy
1Epilepsy Unit, Western Infirmary, Glasgow, Scotland, UK. mjb2k@clinmed.gla.ac.uk
Abstract:
Unlike many other areas of therapeutics, specific regulatory trial programmes are required to be undertaken in newly diagnosed epilepsy to support the licensing of novel antiepileptic drugs for use in drug-naïve patients. To complicate matters further, American and European regulators have taken markedly different approaches to this issue, with the FDA requiring withdrawal to monotherapy data comparing more than one dose of newer agents with historical controls, whereas the EMA recommends undertaking randomised head-to-head studies versus an established comparator. The former studies are designed to show superiority compared to previously published data, whereas the latter will accept a non-inferiority (equivalence) outcome. This paper discusses the positive and negative aspects of both designs and explores novel alternative options. Particular focus has been placed on placebo-controlled studies following a single seizure with supportive electroencephalographic and/or brain imaging evidence, in the hope of identifying a realistic design that will satisfy licensing authorities on both sides of the Atlantic Ocean.
Insights
Regulatory trials for new epilepsy drugs differ between the US and Europe. This paper explores trial designs for novel antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) in drug-naïve epilepsy patients, aiming for transatlantic regulatory approval.
Area of Science:
- Neurology
- Clinical Pharmacology
- Regulatory Science
Background:
- Licensing novel antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) for drug-naïve epilepsy patients requires specific regulatory trial programs.
- Regulatory approaches in the US (FDA) and Europe (EMA) differ significantly for these trials.
Purpose of the Study:
- To discuss the advantages and disadvantages of current FDA and EMA trial designs for new AEDs.
- To explore novel trial designs that could satisfy both American and European regulatory authorities.
Main Methods:
- Comparative analysis of FDA's withdrawal to monotherapy data with historical controls versus EMA's head-to-head randomized studies.
- Exploration of alternative trial designs, focusing on placebo-controlled studies after a single seizure with EEG/imaging support.
Main Results:
- FDA requires superiority data against historical controls, while EMA accepts non-inferiority data against established comparators.
- Current designs present challenges for drug developers seeking simultaneous approval.
Conclusions:
- There is a need for harmonized or adaptable trial designs to streamline the approval process for new antiepileptic drugs.
- Novel approaches, such as carefully selected placebo-controlled studies, may offer a viable path to satisfy diverse regulatory requirements.
Related Concept Videos
Bioequivalence Experimental Study Designs: Repeated Measures, Cross-Over, Carry-Over, and Latin Square Designs
Clinical Trials: Overview
Clinical Trials
There are four phases in a clinical trial. A phase one...
Dosage Regimens: Designs and Approaches
Crossover Experiments
Crossover designs are performed even with smaller sample sizes since the samples can act as their controls. These are better than simple randomized trials since patients are exposed to all the treatments.
Bioequivalence Experimental Study Designs: Completely Randomized and Randomized Block Designs
