An accompanying editorial describes the current regulatory process as “a thicket of special programs, flexible review criteria, and generous incentives,” and suggests starting points for reforms, including improving access to biosimilars.
An article published Tuesday in JAMA raises concerns that special and accelerated drug approval programs at the FDA in recent decades may have resulted in a process that approves drugs based on weaker data, without reducing overall drug development time.
An accompanying editorial describes the current regulatory process as “a thicket of special programs, flexible review criteria, and generous incentives,” and suggests starting points for reforms, including improving access to biosimilars.
In the article, Darrow et al. describe the evolution of FDA’s approach to drug approval from 1983 to 2018 based on federal laws, FDA regulations, drug approval records, and user fee records.
FDA must balance rigorous testing of new drugs to clearly define benefits and risks against timely approval for drug makers and access for patients. Special development, protection from generic competition, and expedited approval programs, such as Orphan Drug, Fast-Track, Accelerated Approval, Priority Review, and Breakthrough Therapy, were instituted by FDA to support drug development, especially for rare and serious diseases. However, in 2018, 81% of all new drugs won regulatory approval through one or more of the expedited programs, the article noted.
Special approval programs have increased administrative costs at FDA (paid for mostly by user fees), and postponements of generic competition have been costly to the US healthcare system, the authors noted.
Over the time period analyzed by the authors, FDA has accepted more surrogate measures, and as a result harder and more relevant clinical endpoints are studied less often. In 1995-1997, 80.6% of drug approvals were supported by at least 2 pivotal trials, compared to 52.8% in 2015-2017. The authors caution that reliance on surrogate measures may accelerate the approval of drugs that pose significant risk but have little clinical value.
The article reports that although FDA shortened its review times from more than 3 years in 1983 to less than 1 year in 2017, overall drug development time (from beginning human studies to approval) has not changed: approximately 8 years. The rate of new drug approvals (other than generics and biologics) has not increased substantially since 1983.
On the other hand, the authors acknowledge some positive outcomes. The median number of generics has increased following legislation to incentivize and accelerate generic drug development. Plus, biologic approvals are increasing over time, reflecting technological advancement. Although drugs are now supported by fewer studies before approval, the number of patients in these studies has not declined.
In the accompanying editorial, Joshua M. Sharfstein, MD, the former principal deputy commissioner of the FDA, suggests 4 starting points for reforms:
References
1. Darrow JJ, Avorn J, Kesselheim AS. FDA approval and regulation of pharmaceuticals, 1983-2018. JAMA. 2020;323(2):164-176. doi:10.1001/jama.2019.20288.
2. Sharfstein JM. Reform at the FDA—In need of reform. JAMA. 2020;323(2):123-124. doi:10.1001/jama.2019.20288.
Julie Reed: Why 2024 Is Important for Biosimilars
April 17th 2024Julie Reed, executive director of the Biosimilars Forum, showcases how the biosimilar industry is expected to develop throughout 2024, including major policy changes and hope for continued improvement in market share for adalimumab biosimilars.
A New Chapter: How 2023 Will Shape the US Biosimilar Space for 2024 and Beyond
December 31st 2023On this episode of Not So Different, Cencora's Brian Biehn and Corey Ford take a look back at major policy and regulatory advancements in 2023 and how these changes will alter the space going forward.
Alvotech’s Stelara Biosimilar, Selarsdi, Receives FDA Approval
April 16th 2024Alvotech’s Selarsdi (ustekinumab-aekn), a biosimilar referencing Stelara (ustekinumab), gained FDA approval, making it the second ustekinumab biosimilar and second for the company to be given the green light for the American market.
The Subcutaneous Revolution: Zymfentra and the Future of IBD Care With Dr Andres Yarur
December 17th 2023On this episode of Not So Different, Andres Yarur, MD, a researcher and associate professor of medicine at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, discusses the significance of the FDA approval for Zymfentra, the world's first subcutaneous infliximab product, for patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).
BioRationality: Removing the Misconceptions Surrounding Interchangeability
April 15th 2024Sarfaraz K. Niazi, PhD, outlines the current state of interchangeable biosimilars in the US and policy changes needed to clear up misconceptions surrounding the meaning behind interchangeability designations.
Biosimilars Council: PBM Rebate Schemes Cost Americans, Payers $6 Billion
April 10th 2024A report from the Biosimilars Council evaluating IQVIA data found that rebate schemes orchestrated by pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) are costing US patients and payers billions of dollars by suppressing biosimilar adoption.