British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2026
Defining a comprehensive set of value assessment criteria for funders of drug repurposing initiatives.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Hosszú Dalma, Gyöngyösi Kristóf, Perényi András, van der Meer Helene G, Huijbers Dunja, Pantziarka Pan, Inotai András, Lo Donald C, Thompson Rick, Kaló Zoltán, Csanádi Marcell
Аннотация
AIMS: This study aims to develop a structured list of value assessment criteria for drug repurposing (DR) projects designed to support consistent, evidence-informed decision-making by funders. The assessment criteria were developed within the REMEDi4ALL project, a multi-stakeholder Horizon Europe funded initiative to advance DR and were validated through consultation with public and philanthropic funding organizations.
METHODS: Relevant assessment criteria were identified through a review of organizational documents and stakeholder consultations and were further supplemented by a targeted literature search in PubMed and Google Scholar.
RESULTS: A total of 330 candidate criteria were identified from funder documentation and peer-reviewed literature. Following internal review and consultation with additional REMEDi4ALL partner organizations, 37 assessment criteria were defined and organized into five domains: basic enablers, expected benefits, technical implementation, business opportunity and fundraising profile. Each criterion was assigned a clear, standardized definition to ensure consistent interpretation and application.
CONCLUSIONS: This study presents a transparent, adaptable and non-proprietary set of value assessment criteria to support the evaluation of DR proposals. It addresses key methodological and applicability gaps by enabling funders to apply structured assessments that reflect diverse value perspectives and stages of development in standalone or joint funding settings. The criteria list is clearly defined and grouped into five domains that also serves as the core for further application. The list has already been implemented in an Excel-based application to select, weight and score items based on funder's strategic priorities and project maturity. It is freely available through the REMEDi4ALL platform.
METHODS: Relevant assessment criteria were identified through a review of organizational documents and stakeholder consultations and were further supplemented by a targeted literature search in PubMed and Google Scholar.
RESULTS: A total of 330 candidate criteria were identified from funder documentation and peer-reviewed literature. Following internal review and consultation with additional REMEDi4ALL partner organizations, 37 assessment criteria were defined and organized into five domains: basic enablers, expected benefits, technical implementation, business opportunity and fundraising profile. Each criterion was assigned a clear, standardized definition to ensure consistent interpretation and application.
CONCLUSIONS: This study presents a transparent, adaptable and non-proprietary set of value assessment criteria to support the evaluation of DR proposals. It addresses key methodological and applicability gaps by enabling funders to apply structured assessments that reflect diverse value perspectives and stages of development in standalone or joint funding settings. The criteria list is clearly defined and grouped into five domains that also serves as the core for further application. The list has already been implemented in an Excel-based application to select, weight and score items based on funder's strategic priorities and project maturity. It is freely available through the REMEDi4ALL platform.