MDOI Convergence Chronicles 110.0506/CON.2026.00480
110.0506/CON.2026.00480
Article

Analytical Methods for Comparing Uncontrolled Trials With External Controls From Real-World Data: A Systematic Literature Review and Comparison With European Regulatory and Health Technology Assessment Practice

Milou A. Hogervorst, PharmD, PhD, Kanaka V. Soman, MSc, Helga Gardarsdottir, PharmD, PhD, Wim G. Goettsch, PhD, Lourens T. Bloem, PharmD, PhD 2025 Convergence Chronicles

Abstract

Objectives: This study aimed to provide an overview of analytical methods in scientific literature for comparing uncontrolled medicine trials with external controls from individual patient data realworld data (IPD-RWD) and to compare these methods with recommendations made in guidelines from European regulatory and health technology assessment (HTA) organizations and with their evaluations described in assessment reports. Methods: A systematic literature review (until March 1, 2023) in PubMed and Connected Papers was performed to identify analytical methods for comparing uncontrolled trials with external controls from IPD-RWD. These methods were compared descriptively with methods recommended in method guidelines and encountered in assessment reports of the European Medicines Agency (2015-2020) and 4 European HTA organizations (2015-2023). Results: Thirty-four identified scientific articles described analytical methods for comparing uncontrolled trial data with IPD-RWD–based external controls. The various methods covered controlling for confounding and/or dependent censoring, correction for missing data, and analytical comparative modeling methods. Seven guidelines also focused on research design, RWD quality, and transparency aspects, and 4 of those recommended analytical methods for comparisons with IPD-RWD. The methods discussed in regulatory (n = 15) and HTA (n = 35) assessment reports were often based on aggregate data and lacked transparency owing to the few details provided. Conclusions: Literature and guidelines suggest a methodological approach to comparing uncontrolled trials with external controls from IPD-RWD similar to target trial emulation, using state-ofthe-art methods. External controls supporting regulatory and HTA decision making were rarely in line with this approach. Twelve recommendations are proposed to improve the quality and acceptability of these methods

Identifier Metadata

Identifier 110.0506/CON.2026.00480
Canonical mdoi:110.0506/CON.2026.00480
Resolver URL https://mdoi.org/110.0506/CON.2026.00480
Resource URL Open resource
Document URL Open document
Content Type Article
Authors Milou A. Hogervorst, PharmD, PhD, Kanaka V. Soman, MSc, Helga Gardarsdottir, PharmD, PhD, Wim G. Goettsch, PhD, Lourens T. Bloem, PharmD, PhD
Year 2025
Depositor Convergence Chronicles Organisation
Prefix 110.0506
Registered July 8, 2026
Updated July 8, 2026
Status Active
Visibility Public

Cite This Identifier

APA 7th Edition

Click to copy

MLA 9th Edition

Click to copy

Chicago 17th Edition

Click to copy

BibTeX

Click to copy

Persistent Identifier

mdoi:110.0506/CON.2026.00480

Click to copy

About MDOI

MDOI identifiers are permanent and unique identifiers assigned to digital objects to ensure long-term access, tracking, and referencing.

  • MDOI provides a permanent identity for digital objects.
  • Each MDOI is unique and points to one specific resource.
  • The prefix, such as 110.XXXX, identifies the registrant.
  • The suffix identifies the exact digital object.
  • MDOI remains stable even when a website URL changes.
  • It helps prevent broken links in digital publishing.
  • It makes academic and digital resources easier to find and cite.
  • MDOI supports proper tracking and management of digital content.
  • It improves the credibility and visibility of published resources.
  • MDOI ensures digital objects remain accessible, traceable, and reliable over time.
CO
Registered by Convergence Chronicles