Redefining Regulatory Proof: The End of the Two-Trial Paradigm.

Authors

Jean-Christophe Lega, Steeve Provencher, Bruno Falissard, Clara Locher, Matthieu Roustit, Arthur Gougeon, Rémy Boussageon, Sylvie Chevret

Published in

Fundamental & clinical pharmacology. Volume 40. Issue 5. Pages e70110.

Abstract

The recent decision to establish a single pivotal trial as the default evidentiary standard for Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval marks a substantive shift in the architecture of regulatory proof. This marks a shift from replication-based validation to a coherence-based model of sufficiency, beyond a procedural adjustment. Because FDA standards likely influence global development strategies, this change will likely extend beyond the United States. Although accelerating access and reducing development costs are legitimate objectives, the reform raises methodological and epistemological concerns. The statistical rationale does not fully incorporate the contextual factors that influence false-positive risk, including prior plausibility and statistical power. Prior plausibility remains informal, and post-marketing evidence seldom restores the epistemic security provided by independent replication. Replication is not merely a statistical redundancy but rather a structural safeguard of robustness and external validity. Without explicit safeguards, increased regulatory flexibility may generate heterogeneity in evidentiary thresholds and progressively weaken the discriminative function of health technology assessment.

PMID:
42595334
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 14 Aug 2026.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Stats

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.