Evaluation of Pre-marketing Factors to Predict Post-marketing Boxed Warnings and Safety Withdrawals

Comparative Assessment of Pivotal Trials Supporting the Indication Approvals of Innovative and Modified New Anticancer Drugs in China, 2016-2022

Background: Since the launch of drug regulatory reform in 2015, China has substantially increased the availability of new cancer therapies. However, the efficacy evidence criteria for modified new anticancer drugs have not been evaluated. This cross-sectional study aimed to assess the pivotal trials supporting the indication approvals of innovative and modified new chemical anticancer drugs in China. Methods: The characteristics of indications, regulatory aspects, and pivotal trial designs were extracted and described. The primary efficacy endpoints of the pivotal clinical trials, including overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), were quantitatively assessed by meta-analysis. Results: Between 2016 and 2022, 77 cancer therapeutics for 107 indications were approved in China based on 128 pivotal trials. Among the 107 indications, 64 (59.8%) were classified as innovative anticancer drugs, and 43 (40.2%) as modified new anticancer drugs. The study found that pivotal trials for innovative approvals tended to be single-arm trials, while modified approvals were more likely to employ randomized clinical trials with larger sample sizes and rigorous designs. Despite innovative drugs often receiving more expedited regulatory designations, there were no statistically significant differences in clinical benefit of OS or PFS outcomes between innovative and modified approvals. Conclusions: These results suggest that the current regulatory framework may prioritize the speed of approval for innovative drugs over the strength of supporting evidence. These findings align with the strategic trends of pharmaceutical companies and regulatory inclinations that aim to expedite the approval of innovative anticancer drugs with a high unmet need, thereby accelerating patients' accessibility to treatment.

An overview of immunotoxicity in drug discovery and development

The immune system is one of the common targets of drugs' toxicity (Immunotoxicity) and/or efficacy (Immunotherapy). Immunotoxicity leads to adverse effects on human health, which raises serious concerns for the regulatory agencies. Currently, immunotoxicity assessment is conducted using different in vitro and in vivo assays. In silico and in vitro human cell-based immunotoxicity assays should also be explored for screening purposes as these are time and cost effective as well as for ethical reasons. For in vivo studies, tier 1-3 assessments (Tier 1: hematology, serum globulin levels, lymphoid organ's weight and histopathology; Tier 2: immunophenotyping, TDAR and cell mediated immunity; and Tier 3: host resistance) should be used. These non-clinical in vivo assessments are useful to select immunological endpoints for clinical trials as well as for precautionary labeling. As per regulatory guidelines, adverse immunogenicity information of drug should be included in product's labeling to make health care practitioner aware of safety concerns before prescribing medicines and patient management (USFDA, 2022a, 2022b). This review mainly focuses on the importance of immunotoxicity assessment during drug discovery and development.

Safety assessment of Yasmin: Real-world adverse event analysis using the FAERS database

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to elucidate the scope and nature of adverse events (AEs) associated with Yasmin.

METHODS

Among the 17,035,572 AE reports collected from the Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database between January 2004 and September 2023, 25,949 reports involved Yasmin. The demographic details, clinical outcomes, and sources of reports were extracted, and four algorithms were used to evaluate adverse drug reactions.

RESULTS

The majority of the AE reports involved females aged 18-45 years. Hospitalization was the most frequently reported serious outcome (46.84 %), with death occurring in 292 patients (1.82 %). The highest number of reports originated from the United States. Adverse reactions spanned across 24 system organ categories (SOCs), and hepatobiliary, vascular, and psychiatric disorders were the most frequently reported AEs. A total of 229 Preferred Terms (PTs) were identified for adverse reactions, with high signal strength observed for conditions such as post-cholecystectomy syndrome. In addition, fear of disease, which has not been previously identified as an AE related to Yasmin, was also identified as a high signal strength side effect.

CONCLUSION

The findings of the present study underscore the importance of monitoring and identifying potential AEs in patients receiving Yasmin, including those not currently listed in the medication instructions.

Learning with an evolving medicine label: how artificial intelligence-based medication recommendation systems must adapt to changing medication labels

INTRODUCTION

Artificial intelligence or machine learning (AI/ML) based systems can help personalize prescribing decisions for individual patients. The recommendations of these clinical decision support systems must relate to the "label" of the medicines involved. The label of a medicine is an approved guide that indicates how to prescribe the drug in a safe and effective manner.

AREAS COVERED

The label for a medicine may evolve as new information on drug safety and effectiveness emerges, leading to the addition or removal of warnings, drug-drug interactions, or to permit new indications. However, the speed at which these updates are made to these AI/ML recommendation systems may be delayed and could influence the safety of prescribing decisions. This article explores the need to keep AI/ML tools 'in sync' with any label changes. Additionally, challenges relating to medicine availability and geographical suitability are discussed.

EXPERT OPINION

These considerations highlight the important role that pharmacoepidemiologists and drug safety professionals must play within the monitoring and use of these tools. Furthermore, these issues highlight the guiding role that regulators need to have in planning and oversight of these tools.

Development, assessment and educational impact of a blended e-learning training program on pharmacovigilance implemented in four African countries

Introduction

Efforts to improve medication access in low-and middle-income countries, particularly in Sub-Saharan Africa, have made progress, especially in the fight against infectious diseases such as tuberculosis. However, challenges exist in establishing effective pharmacovigilance systems. The PhArmacoVIgilance Africa (PAVIA) project was committed to enhancing pharmacovigilance in Tanzania, Eswatini, Nigeria, and Ethiopia, with an emphasis on anti-tuberculosis drugs, utilizing various methods, including training. This study evaluates the PAVIA training program's effectiveness and its adaptation during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

A blended e-learning program, incorporating two courses and a platform for educational materials, was developed. This program, designed to train healthcare professionals in pharmacovigilance, was incorporated into a Training of Trainers model. To evaluate the program effectiveness, we used multiple measures such as assessing knowledge gain through pre-and post-test scores, assessing learners' satisfaction and attitudes via questionnaires, and analyzing Individual Case Safety Reports (ICSRs) in VigiBase to determine the impact on spontaneous reporting systems in the PAVIA countries.

Results

121 learners enrolled in the pilot trainings, including 36 from Tanzania, 34 from Eswatini, 25 from Nigeria, and 26 from Ethiopia. Notably, post-test scores were significantly higher than pre-test scores in all four countries. Following the pilot trainings, multiple step-down training sessions were held in Tanzania, Eswatini, and Nigeria, with a total of 827 learners registering and 421 successfully completing the program. Learners' scores on the post-tests were significantly higher than on the pre-tests for both courses in all three countries. Learners' feedback on the training was overwhelmingly positive. Additionally, a qualitative analysis of ICSRs revealed a substantial increase in reports after the training in Tanzania, Eswatini, and Nigeria.

Discussion

An innovative e-learning program trained healthcare professionals in pharmacovigilance and anti-tuberculosis drug safety over 3 years in four PAVIA countries. The program effectively improved participants' knowledge, received positive feedback, and likely had an impact on reporting rates in Tanzania, Eswatini, and Nigeria, although a direct causal link could not be definitively established due to data limitations and other factors, such as the heightened reporting rates associated with COVID-19 vaccines, that could have contributed to the notable increase in ICSRs.

Epirubicin and gait apraxia: a real-world data analysis of the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System database

Introduction: Epirubicin is widely used in many malignancies with good efficacy and tolerability. However, investigations about adverse events (AEs) using real-world information are still insufficient. Methods: We extracted Epirubicin-related reports submitted between the first quarter of 2014 and first quarter of 2023 from FAERS database. Four algorithms were utilized to evaluate whether there was a significant correlation between Epirubicin and AEs. Results: After de-duplicating, a total of 3919 cases were extracted. Among the 3919 cases, we identified 1472 AEs, 253 of which were found to be adverse drug reactions (ADRs) associated with Epirubicin. We analysed the occurrence of Epirubicin-induced ADRs and found several unexpected significant ADRs, such as hepatic artery stenosis, hepatic artery occlusion, intestinal atresia and so on. Interestingly, we found gait apraxia, a neurological condition, was also significantly associated with Epirubicin. To our knowledge, there haven't studies that have reported an association between gait disorders and the usage of epirubicin. Discussion: Our study identified new unexpected significant ADRs related to Epirubicin, providing new perspectives to the clinical use of Epirubicin.

Toxicologic Pathology Forum: Considerations Regarding Determination of Adversity for Immunopathology Findings in Nonclinical Toxicology Studies with Immune-Modulating Therapeutics

The evaluation of changes in the immune system serves to determine the efficacy and potential immunotoxicologic effects of new products under development. Toxicologic pathologists play critical roles in identifying immune system changes that drive the immunosafety determination. Standard pathology evaluations of therapies and chemicals remain similar; however, biopharmaceutical therapies have moved from simply affecting the immune system to being specifically developed to modify the immune system, which can impact interpretation. Recent explosive growth in immunomodulatory therapies presents a challenge to the toxicologic pathologist, toxicologist, and regulatory reviewer in terms of evaluating the clinical relevance and potential adversity of immune system changes. Beyond the recognition of such changes, there is an increasing expectation to evaluate, describe, and interpret how therapies affect complex immune system pathways for both immunomodulatory therapies and non-immunomodulatory drugs with off-target immunotoxic effects. In this opinion piece, considerations regarding immune system evaluation, the current landscape of immunomodulatory therapies, a brief description of immunotoxicologic (and immunopathologic) endpoints, the importance of integrating such immunosafety data, and relevance to adversity determination are discussed. Importantly, we describe how the current paradigm of determining adversity for immune system changes may be challenging or insufficient and propose a harmonized and flexible approach for assessing adversity.

Boxed Warnings and Off-Label Use of Allergy Medications: Risks, Benefits, and Shared Decision Making

The Food and Drug Administration is tasked with evaluating the efficacy and safety of a drug. Despite having a regimented appraisal process in place, safety evidence can emerge during clinical trials as well as from observations and studies conducted after the drug has been on the market, which might require a boxed warning. The boxed warning is the most severe warning that the Food and Drug Administration can give to an approved drug. It is commonly referred to as a Black Box Warning because it is outlined in the package insert by a thick black box to garner the attention of prescribers and patients. There are currently more than 400 medications that have boxed warnings, and the information addressing major risks associated with a particular drug may, appropriately or inappropriately, influence patient and clinician decision making. Health care professionals must use the best evidence and clinical judgment in determining whether to prescribe medications with these warnings. Use of an approved drug at dosages or for indications other than what it was originally licensed for is referred to as "off-label" and is legal, commonplace, and may be evidence-based. All drugs may expose patients to possible harm, so prescribers have an obligation to discuss the best available evidence regarding benefits and harms so that patients can participate in shared decision making.

Analysis and enhancement of risk management for ethnic differences in antineoplastic drugs in Japan

Background

Risk management in the post-marketing phase is crucial to minimize health problems caused by drugs. Because ethnic factors may affect drug safety, the objective of this study was to explore concrete approaches to reflecting ethnic factors in risk management under multi-regional drug development.

Methods

We assessed Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency (PMDA) review reports on antineoplastic drugs approved as new molecular entities in the last 10 years to identify any differences in the incidence of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) related to myelosuppression, hepatic impairment, renal impairment, and interstitial lung disease between Japanese and non-Japanese populations. In addition, we investigated how those ADRs were handled in the labeling of each drug.

Results

In total, 44 drugs were available for comparing the incidence of ADRs between Japanese and non-Japanese populations. Of these, 32 drugs had a higher incidence of ADRs in the Japanese population. However, the incidence of ADRs in the Japanese population was described in the labeling for 7 drugs, and only the incidence in the overall population in multi-regional phase III trials was described in the labeling for the remaining 25 drugs. Of these 25 drugs, two drugs were immediately placed under emergency safety control measures after approval because of the high incidence of ADRs in Japanese patients.

Conclusions

For drugs that might cause serious ADRs and with a higher incidence in the Japanese population, information should be provided on the incidence in the Japanese population as well as in the overall population.

Safety-Related Drug Withdrawals in China Between 1999 and 2021: A Systematic Investigation and Analysis

INTRODUCTION

The Chinese National Medical Products Administration (NMPA) has emphasized proactive pharmacovigilance throughout the product life cycle in recent years. However, the safety-related withdrawal of drugs from the Chinese market has received less attention.

OBJECTIVES

The primary aim of the study was to investigate the context of withdrawing a drug for safety reasons in China (between 1999 and 2021).

METHODS

Withdrawn drugs were first identified from the Chinese NMPA and United States (US) Food and Drug Administration websites and the World Health Organization's (WHO's) consolidated list of products, WHO Drug Information, and WHO Pharmaceuticals Newsletter. We then searched the China National Knowledge Internet database, Chongqing VIP information database, Wanfang database, PubMed, and Google Scholar for drug withdrawal details. We used the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine criteria to assess the levels of evidence that support withdrawing a drug.

RESULTS

A total of 30 drugs were withdrawn from the Chinese market between 1999 and 2021. The number of withdrawals increased during the stable Chinese drug surveillance period (2012-2021). Evidence from case-series or case-control studies was primarily used to determine the withdrawals of 16 drugs (53.3%). Fifteen drugs were withdrawn from the markets of China and the US, including five drugs (5/15, 33.3%) that were withdrawn in the same year in China and the US.

CONCLUSIONS

The promulgation of regulations and development of advanced passive and active systems have enhanced pharmacovigilance in China. High-quality evidence, coordination with other regulatory authorities, and communication and information sharing should be strengthened to optimize drug safety surveillance and risk management.

[Association between Post-marketing Safety-related Regulatory Actions and Characteristics of New Drugs Approved in Japan between 2005 and 2016]

The pharmacovigilance activities of new drugs are usually planned and conducted based on the clinical safety information obtained at approval. Revealing pre- and post-marketing drug characteristics associated with post-marketing safety-related regulatory actions (PSRAs) would help facilitate pharmacovigilance activities as these activities are not sufficient for early detection of safety signals that require warning. Therefore, we investigated the association between PSRAs and characteristics of new drugs in Japan. New active substances approved in Japan between fiscal year 2005 and 2015 were analyzed. PSRAs were defined as "revisions of precautions in drug package insert" instructed by the regulatory authority within the first 5 years after the initial approval (up to 2021). Drug characteristics included therapeutic area, number of Japanese subjects in clinical trials, dose-response study in Japanese subjects, approval lag between Japan and the United States or Europe (US/EU), novelty of the drug, estimated number of target patients, and number of supplemental approvals. Negative binomial regression and path analyses were performed to investigate the association between PSRAs and drug characteristics. PSRAs were more common among antineoplastic agents and drugs with a larger estimated number of target patients and were less common among drugs with a longer approval lag between Japan and the US/EU. Supplemental approval was more common among antineoplastic agents, and there were fewer target patients for novel drugs. For new drugs with the characteristics identified in the present study, it is important to proactively collect post-market safety information by intensifying patient monitoring.

Association of expedited review programmes with postmarketing safety events of new drugs approved by the US food and drug administration between 2007 and 2017

Objective

To explore the associations between the risks of postmarketing safety events of new drugs and the four expedited programmes of priority review, accelerated approval, fast track and breakthrough therapy established by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA); and to investigate whether multiple uses of expedited programmes, and the combinations of expedited programmes with orphan designation, were relevant to different safety profiles.

Design

Cohort study.

Setting

USA.

Participants

All new drugs approved by the FDA between 1 January 2007 and 31 December 2017, followed up until 10 April 2021.

Outcome measures

Safety events included safety-related withdrawal, new boxed warning, drug safety communication, postapproval risk evaluation mitigation strategy and safety-related labelling changes. The duration from marketing approval to the occurrence of a safety event was measured.

Method

Cox models were performed to determine the factors related to the time-to-safety event.

Results

The FDA approved 338 new drugs between 2007 and 2017, among which 53.6% (181) were under expedited review and 32.2% (109) received two or more expedited programmes. It took median time of 1.75 years (IQR 1.10–2.93) and 2.31 years (IQR 1.33–4.21), respectively, for new drugs to be observed of their first event and first serious event. The raised risk for first safety event was found to associate with breakthrough therapy (adjusted HR 1.83; 95% CI 1.21 to 2.77; p=0.004), and with the combination of accelerated approval with orphan designation (adjusted HR 2.84; 95% CI 1.12 to 7.23; p=0.028). Triple or more use of expedited programmes correlated with higher risk for first serious event (adjusted HR 4.16; 95% CI 1.69 to 10.22; p=0.002).

Conclusions

The increased risks of the breakthrough therapies, accelerated orphan drugs and triple or more use of expedited programmes indicated the necessity for intensive postmarketing risk surveillance.

Postmarketing safety of orphan drugs: a longitudinal analysis of the US Food and Drug Administration database between 1999 and 2018

Background

Information about the specific regulatory environment of orphan drugs is scarce and inconsistent. Uncertainties surrounding the postmarketing long-term safety of orphan drugs remain. This study aimed to evaluate the labelling changes of orphan drugs and to identify postmarketing safety-associated approval factors.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study includes all drugs with orphan drug designation approved by the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research of the US Food and Drug Administration between 1999 and 2018. Main outcomes are safety-related labelling changes up to 31 December 2019. We defined any safety-related labelling changes as postmarketing safety events (PMSE). Safety-related withdrawals, suspensions, and boxed warnings were further categorised as severe postmarketing safety events (SPSE). Outcome measurements include frequencies of PMSE, SPSE, and association between approval factors and the occurrence of safety events.

Results

Amongst the 214 drugs identified with orphan drug designation (25.7% biologics), 83.6% were approved through at least one expedited programme, and 29.4% were approved with boxed warnings. During a median follow-up of 6.74 years since approval, 69.2% and 14.5% of the analysed orphan drugs had PMSE and SPSE, respectively. Safety-related withdrawal (0%, 0/214), suspended marketing (0.46%, 1/214) and new boxed warnings are uncommon (3.7%, 8/214). The safety-related labelling changes were more frequent in the drugs approved with boxed warnings [Incidence rate ratio (IRR): 1.95 (1.02–3.73)] and approved for long-term use [IRR: 2.76 (1.52–5.00)].

Conclusions and Relevance

In this long-term postmarketing analysis, approximately 70% of FDA-approved orphan drugs had safety-related labelling changes although severe safety events were rare. While maintaining early access to orphan drugs, the drug regulatory body has taken timely regulatory action with postmarketing surveillance to ensure patient safety.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13023-021-02166-9.

Safety of medicines and vaccines - building next generation capability

The systematic safety surveillance of real-world use of medicinal products and related activities (pharmacovigilance) started in earnest as a scientific field only in the 1960s. While developments have occurred over the past 50 years, adding to its complexity and sophistication, the extent to which some of these advances have positively impacted the capability for ensuring patient safety is questionable. We review how the conduct of safety surveillance has changed, highlight recent scientific advances, and argue how they need to be harnessed to enhance pharmacovigilance in the future. Specifically, we describe five changes that we believe should and will need to happen globally in the coming years: (i) better, more diverse data used for safety; (ii) the switch from manual activities to automation; (iii) removal of limited value, extraneous transactional activities and replacement with sharpened focus on scientific efforts to improve patient safety; (iv) patient-involved and focussed safety; and (v) personalised safety.

Comprehensive evaluation of post-approval regulatory actions during the drug lifecycle - a focus on benefits and risks

Background: Prior studies investigated regulatory actions that reflected a negative impact on drug risks. We aimed to evaluate occurrence of regulatory actions that reflected a negative or positive impact on benefits or risks, as well as relations between them.Research design and methods: We followed EMA-approved innovative drugs from approval (2009-2010) until July 2020 or withdrawal to identify regulatory actions. We assessed these for impact on benefits or risks and relations between actions. Additionally, we scrutinized drug lifecycles for time-variant characteristics that may contribute to specific patterns of regulatory actions.Results: We identified 14 letters and 361 label updates for 40 drugs. Of the label updates, 85 (24%) reflected a positive impact, mostly concerning indications, and 276 (76%) a negative impact, mostly adverse drug reactions. Many updates (54%) occurred simultaneously with other updates, also if these reflected a different impact. Furthermore, levels of patient exposure, innovativeness, needs for regulatory learning and unexpected risks may contribute to patterns of regulatory actions.Conclusions: Almost a quarter of regulatory actions reflected a positive impact on benefits and risks. Also, simultaneous learning about benefits and risks suggests an important role for drug development in risk characterization. These findings may impact regulatory analyses and decision-making.

Drug Safety Data Curation and Modeling in ChEMBL: Boxed Warnings and Withdrawn Drugs

The safety of marketed drugs is an ongoing concern, with some of the more frequently prescribed medicines resulting in serious or life-threatening adverse effects in some patients. Safety-related information for approved drugs has been curated to include the assignment of toxicity class(es) based on their withdrawn status and/or black box warning information described on medicinal product labels. The ChEMBL resource contains a wide range of bioactivity data types, from early "Discovery" stage preclinical data for individual compounds through to postclinical data on marketed drugs; the inclusion of the curated drug safety data set within this framework can support a wide range of safety-related drug discovery questions. The curated drug safety data set will be made freely available through ChEMBL and updated in future database releases.

The Potential Benefit of Expedited Development and Approval Programs in Precision Medicine

BACKGROUND

Increased understanding of the molecular causes of disease has begun to fulfill the promise of precision medicine with the development of targeted drugs, particularly for serious diseases with unmet needs. The drug approval regulatory process is a critical component to the continued growth of precision medicine drugs and devices. To facilitate the development and approval process of drugs for serious unmet needs, four expedited approval programs have been developed in the US: priority review, accelerated approval, fast track, and breakthrough therapy programs.

METHODS

To determine if expedited approval programs are fulfilling the intended goals, we reviewed drug approvals by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) between 2011 and 2017 for new molecular entities (NMEs).

RESULTS

From 2011 through 2017, the FDA approved 250 NMEs, ranging from 27 approvals in 2013 to 46 in 2017. The NME approvals spanned 22 different disease classes; almost one-third of all NMEs were for oncology treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

As these pathways are utilized more, additional legislative changes may be needed to re-align incentives to promote continued development of innovative drugs for serious unmet needs in a safe, efficacious, and affordable manner.

Association between FDA and EMA expedited approval programs and therapeutic value of new medicines: retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To characterize the therapeutic value of new drugs approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medicines Agency (EMA) and the association between these ratings and regulatory approval through expedited programs.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

New drugs approved by the FDA and EMA between 2007 and 2017, with follow-up through 1 April 2020.

DATA SOURCES

Therapeutic value was measured using ratings of new drugs by five independent organizations (Prescrire and health authorities of Canada, France, Germany, and Italy).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Proportion of new drugs rated as having high therapeutic value; association between high therapeutic value rating and expedited status.

RESULTS

From 2007 through 2017, the FDA and EMA approved 320 and 268 new drugs, respectively, of which 181 (57%) and 39 (15%) qualified for least one expedited program. Among 267 new drugs with a therapeutic value rating, 84 (31%) were rated as having high therapeutic value by at least one organization. Compared with non-expedited drugs, a greater proportion of expedited drugs were rated as having high therapeutic value among both FDA approvals (45% (69/153) v 13% (15/114); P<0.001) and EMA approvals (67% (18/27) v 27% (65/240); P<0.001). The sensitivity and specificity of expedited program for a drug being independently rated as having high therapeutic value were 82% (95% confidence interval 72% to 90%) and 54% (47% to 62%), respectively, for the FDA, compared with 25.3% (16.4% to 36.0%) and 90.2% (85.0% to 94.1%) for the EMA.

CONCLUSIONS

Less than a third of new drugs approved by the FDA and EMA over the past decade were rated as having high therapeutic value by at least one of five independent organizations. Although expedited drugs were more likely than non-expedited drugs to be highly rated, most expedited drugs approved by the FDA but not the EMA were rated as having low therapeutic value.

Assessment of Clinical Trials Supporting US Food and Drug Administration Approval of Novel Therapeutic Agents, 1995-2017

IMPORTANCE

Since the introduction of the Fast Track designation in 1988, the number of special regulatory programs available for the approval of new drugs and biologics by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has increased, offering the agency flexibility with respect to evidentiary requirements.

OBJECTIVE

To characterize pivotal efficacy trials supporting the approval of new drugs and biologics during the past 3 decades.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This cross-sectional study included 273 new drugs and biologics approved by the FDA for 339 indications from 1995 to 1997, from 2005 to 2007, and from 2015 to 2017.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Therapeutics were classified by product type and therapeutic area as well as orphan designation and use of special regulatory programs, such as Priority Review and Accelerated Approval. Pivotal trials were characterized by use of randomization, blinding, types of comparators, primary end points, number of treated patients, and trial duration, both individually and aggregated by each indication approval.

RESULTS

A total of 273 new drugs and biologics were approved by the FDA in these 3 periods (107 [39.2%] in 1995-1997; 57 [20.9%] in 2005-2007; and 109 [39.9%] in 2015-2017), representing 339 indications (157 [46.3%], 64 [18.9%], and 118 [34.8%], respectively). The proportion of therapeutic approvals using at least 1 special regulatory program increased (37 [34.6%] in 1995-1997; 33 [57.9%] in 2005-2007; and 70 [64.2%] in 2015-2017), as did indication approvals receiving an orphan designation (20 [12.7%] in 1995-1997; 17 [26.6%] in 2005-2007, and 45 [38.1%] in 2015-2017). The most common therapeutic areas differed over time (infectious disease, 53 [33.8%] in 1995-1997 vs cancer, 32 [27.1%] in 2015-2017). When considering the aggregate pivotal trials supporting each indication approval, the proportion of indications supported by at least 2 pivotal trials decreased (80.6% [95% CI, 72.6%-87.2%] in 1995-1997; 60.3% [95% CI, 47.2%-72.4%] in 2005-2007; and 52.8% [95% CI, 42.9%-62.6%] in 2015-2017; P < .001). The proportion of indications supported by only single-group pivotal trials increased (4.0% [95% CI, 1.3%-9.2%] in 1995-1997; 12.7% [95% CI, 5.6%-23.5%] in 2005-2007; and 17.0% [95% CI, 10.4%-25.5%] in 2015-2017; P = .001), whereas the proportion supported by at least 1 pivotal trial of 6 months' duration increased (25.8% [95% CI, 18.4%-34.4%] in 1995-1997; 34.9% [95% CI, 23.3%-48.0%] in 2005-2007; and 46.2% [95% CI, 36.5%-56.2%] in 2015-2017; P = .001).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this study, more recent FDA approvals of new drugs and biologics were based on fewer pivotal trials, which, when aggregated by indication, had less rigorous designs but longer trial durations, suggesting an ongoing need for continued evaluation of therapeutic safety and efficacy after approval.

A description of medicines-related safety issues evaluated through a referral procedure at the EU level after 2012

INTRODUCTION

Important drug safety issues are evaluated through a referral procedure in the EU by the Pharmacovigilance Risk Assessment Committee (PRAC) within the European Medicines Agency. We aim to describe all safety-related referrals assessed by the PRAC by June 2019.

METHODS

Publicly available data on safety issues assessed through referral procedures that reached a final decision during July 2012-June 2019 were identified, analyzed and classified according to predefined criteria.

RESULTS

Fifty-one safety issues were assessed by PRAC for 45 medicines/combinations/therapeutic classes during this timeframe. Referrals were initiated mostly by the European Commission (16) and France (8). Nine medicines were authorized in the last five years, the rest being well-established drugs. In four cases (flupirtine, hydroxyethyl-starch, valproate, codeine) PRAC re-assessed the same risks as previous recommendations have not been effective. Post-referral recommendations consisted of updates of the summary of product characteristics and package leaflet (42), Direct Healthcare Professional Communication (32), and other additional risk minimization measures (RMMs). Withdrawal was recommended for seven active substances.

CONCLUSIONS

PRAC recommended routine or additional RMMs for most referrals. Complete withdrawal of a drug or withdrawal of certain pharmaceutical forms or concentrations was advised only when the risk could not be managed by RMMs.

Medicare Prescription Drug Plan Formulary Restrictions After Postmarket FDA Black Box Warnings

BACKGROUND

The boxed warning (also known as "black box warning") is one of the FDA's strongest safety actions for pharmaceuticals. After the FDA issues black box warnings for drugs, prescribing changes have been inconsistent. Formulary management may provide an opportunity to restrict access to drugs with serious safety concerns.

OBJECTIVE

To examine Medicare prescription drug plan formulary changes after new FDA postmarket black box warnings and major updates to preexisting black box warnings.

METHODS

In this cohort study, we identified each drug that received a new FDA postmarket black box warning or a major update to a preexisting black box warning from January 2008 through June 2015 and examined its formulary coverage. The main outcome measure was the proportion of Medicare prescription drug plan formularies providing unrestrictive coverage immediately before the black box warning, at least 1 year after the warning and at least 2 years after the warning. Unrestrictive formulary coverage was defined as coverage of a drug without prior authorization or step-therapy requirements.

RESULTS

Of 101 new black box warnings and major updates to preexisting warnings affecting 68 unique drug formulations, the mean percentage of formularies providing unrestrictive coverage changed from 65.4% (95% CI = 59.6%-71.2%) prewarning; 62.6% (95% CI = 56.3%-68.9%, P = 0.04) at least 1 year postwarning; and 61.9% (95% CI = 55.4%-68.5%, P = 0.10) at least 2 years postwarning.

CONCLUSIONS

The mean percentage of Medicare prescription drug plan formularies providing unrestrictive coverage decreased modestly by approximately 3 percentage points after drugs received postmarket FDA black box warnings. Formulary restrictions may present an underused mechanism to reduce use of potentially unsafe medications.

DISCLOSURES

This study was supported by a student research grant received by Solotke and provided by the Yale School of Medicine Office of Student Research under National Institutes of Health training grant award T35DK104689. Karaca-Mandic, Shah, and Ross acknowledge support from Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) grant R01 HS025164, which studies factors associated with de-adoption of drug therapies shown to be ineffective or unsafe. The content of this study is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health. The authors assume full responsibility for the accuracy and completeness of the ideas presented. Ross has received support from the following: the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as part of the Centers for Excellence in Regulatory Science and Innovation (CERSI) program; Johnson and Johnson through Yale University to develop methods of clinical trial data sharing; Medtronic and the FDA to develop methods for postmarket surveillance of medical devices; the Blue Cross Blue Shield Association to better understand medical technology evaluation; the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) to develop and maintain performance measures that are used for public reporting; the AHRQ to examine community predictors of health care quality; and the Laura and John Arnold Foundation, which established the Collaboration for Research Integrity and Transparency at Yale University. Shah has received support from the FDA as part of the CERSI program. In addition, he has received support through the Mayo Clinic from CMS, AHRQ, National Science Foundation, and Patient-centered Outcomes Research Institute. Karaca-Mandic has provided consulting services to Precision Health Economics and Tactile Medical for work unrelated to this manuscript. Dhruva and Solotke have no conflicts of interest to report.

Patient-Centered Cancer Drug Development: Clinical Trials, Regulatory Approval, and Value Assessment

Historically, patient experience, including symptomatic toxicities, physical function, and disease-related symptoms during treatment or their perspectives on clinical trials, has played a secondary role in cancer drug development. Regulatory criteria for drug approval require that drugs are safe and effective, and almost all drug approvals have been based only on efficacy endpoints rather than on quality-of-life (QoL) assessments. In contrast to Europe, information regarding the impact of drugs on patients' QoL is rarely included in oncology drug labeling in the United States. Until recently, patient input and preferences have not been incorporated into the design and conduct of clinical trials. In recent years, a more in-depth understanding of cancer biology, as well as regulatory changes focused on expediting cancer drug development and approval, has allowed earlier access to novel therapeutic agents. Understanding the implications of these expedited programs is important for oncologists and patients, given the rapid expansion of these programs. In this article, we provide an overview of the role of QoL in the regulatory drug-approval process, key issues regarding trial participation from the patient perspective, and the implications of key expedited approval programs that are increasingly being used by regulatory bodies for cancer care.

New safety signals assessed by the Pharmacovigilance Risk Assessment Committee at EU level in 2014-2017

BACKGROUND

Safety monitoring of all drugs throughout their entire life cycle is mandatory in order to protect the public health. Our objective was to describe all new safety signals assessed at EU level by the Pharmacovigilance Risk Assessment Committee (PRAC).

METHODS

Publicly available data on signals assessment from PRAC meeting minutes for the period January 2014-November 2017 were analyzed and classified.

RESULTS

A total of 239 new signals for 194 drugs/drug combinations/therapeutic classes were evaluated by PRAC. A total of 154 signals were triggered by spontaneous reporting, 31 by literature case reports, and 26 by observational studies. In 188 signals, the drugs involved were authorized for more than 5 years. The drug classes for which most signals were detected were antineoplastic/immunomodulators (n = 75), anti-infectives (n = 34), and drugs acting on the nervous system (n = 27). Signals were triggered for drug interactions (n = 15), in utero exposure (n = 7), medication errors (n = 6), and for different disorders, among which the skin/subcutaneous tissue disorders were more common. PRAC recommendations consisted in label updates (n = 86), in Direct Healthcare Professional Communications (n = 17), and in eight recommendations for a more complex evaluation through referral procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

Most new signals assessed were triggered by spontaneous reporting and led to routine risk minimization measures, such as updating the product information.

The US Food and Drug Administration’s expedited approval programs: Evidentiary standards, regulatory trade-offs, and potential improvements

The US Food and Drug Administration has several regulatory programs and pathways to expedite the development and approval of therapeutic agents aimed at treating serious or life-debilitating conditions. A common feature of these programs is the regulatory flexibility, which allows for a customized approval approach that enables market authorization on the basis of less rigorous evidence, in exchange for requiring postmarket evidence generation. An increasing share of therapeutic agents approved by the Food and Drug Administration in recent years are associated with expedited programs. In this article, we provide an overview of the evidentiary standards required by the Food and Drug Administration’s expedited development and review programs, summarize the findings of the recent academic literature demonstrating some of the limitations of these programs, and outline potential opportunities to address these limitations. Recent evidence suggests that therapeutic agents in the Food and Drug Administration’s expedited programs are approved on the basis of fewer and smaller studies that may lack comparator groups and random allocation, and rather than focusing on clinical outcomes for study endpoints, rely instead on surrogate markers of disease. Once on the market, agents receiving expedited approvals are often quickly incorporated into clinical practice, and evidence generated in the postmarket period may not necessarily address the evidentiary limitations at the time of market entry. Furthermore, not all pathways require additional postmarket studies. Evidence suggests that drugs in expedited approval programs are associated with a greater likelihood that the Food and Drug Administration will take a safety action following market entry. There are several opportunities to improve the timeliness, information value, and validity of the pre- and postmarket studies of therapeutic agents receiving expedited approvals. When use of nonrandomized and uncontrolled studies cannot be avoided prior to market entry, randomized trials should be mandatory in the postmarket period, unless there are strong justifications for not carrying out such studies. In the premarket period, validity of the surrogate markers can be improved by more rigorously evaluating their correlation with patient-relevant clinical outcomes. Opportunities to reduce the duration, complexity, and cost of postmarket randomized trials should not compromise their validity and instead incorporate pragmatic “real-world” design elements. Despite recent enthusiasm for widely using real-world evidence, adaptive designs, and pragmatic trials in the regulatory setting, caution is warranted until large-scale empirical evaluations demonstrate their validity compared to more traditional trial designs.

Postmarket Safety Outcomes for New Molecular Entity (NME) Drugs Approved by the Food and Drug Administration Between 2002 and 2014

We ascertained a comprehensive list of postmarket safety outcomes, defined as a safety-related market withdrawal or an update to a safety-related section of product label for 278 new molecular entity drugs (NMEs) with a follow-up period of up to 13 years. At least one safety-related update was added to 195 (70.1%) labels of the drugs studied. Updates occurred as early as 160 days after approval and throughout the follow-up period. The period between the second and eighth postapproval year was the most active, with a slight attenuation thereafter. The times to the first safety outcome were significantly shorter for NMEs approved with a fast-track designation (P = 0.02) or under an accelerated approval using a surrogate endpoint (P = 0.03). Our findings underscore the importance of a robust safety surveillance system throughout a drug's lifecycle and for practitioners and patients to remain updated on drug safety profiles.

New and incremental FDA black box warnings from 2008 to 2015

BACKGROUND

The boxed warning (also known as 'black box warning [BBW]') is one of the strongest drug safety actions that the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) can implement, and often warns of serious risks. The objective of this study was to comprehensively characterize BBWs issued for drugs after FDA approval.

METHODS

We identified all post-marketing BBWs from January 2008 through June 2015 listed on FDA's MedWatch and Drug Safety Communications websites. We used each drug's prescribing information to classify its BBW as new, major update to a preexisting BBW, or minor update. We then characterized these BBWs with respect to pre-specified BBW-specific and drug-specific features.

RESULTS

There were 111 BBWs issued to drugs on the US market, of which 29% (n = 32) were new BBWs, 32% (n = 35) were major updates, and 40% (n = 44) were minor updates. New BBWs and major updates were most commonly issued for death (51%) and cardiovascular risk (27%). The new BBWs and major updates impacted 200 drug formulations over the study period, of which 64% were expected to be used chronically and 58% had available alternatives without a BBW.

CONCLUSIONS

New BBWs and incremental updates to existing BBWs are frequently added to drug labels after regulatory approval.