New challenges in quality control and licensure. Regulation

Timeliness of review and approval of new drugs in Canada from 1999 through 2001: is progress being made?

BACKGROUND

The median time to approval of new drugs in Canada decreased considerably in the mid-1990s, although it continued to be longer than in such countries as Australia, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Ongoing concern about approval times pointed to a need for a further international comparison.

OBJECTIVE

This study was designed to assess whether there have been continuing improvements in drug approval times in Canada relative to these other countries.

METHODS

Application and approval dates of new chemical or biological substances approved for marketing from 1999 through 2001 were requested from the Canadian, Australian, and Swedish regulatory agencies. Information for the United States was derived from publications of the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America. The regulatory agency for the United Kingdom does not release application dates, although these were the same as the Swedish application dates for most drugs approved in both countries through the centralized European Union (EU) review procedure. Application dates for drugs licensed under the EU mutual-recognition arrangement or in the United Kingdom only were requested from the relevant pharmaceutical companies.

RESULTS

One hundred eighty-six new drugs were approved in >/=1 of the countries studied between January 1999 and December 2001: 17 (9.1%) in all 5 countries, 25 (13.4%) in 4, 27 (14.5%) in 3, 39 (21.0%) in 2, and 78 (41.9%) in 1. Approval times were longer in Canada than in Australia, although not significantly so (median time, 645 and 551 days, respectively). Canadian and Australian approval times were significantly longer than those in Sweden (431 days), the United Kingdom (479 days), and the United States (371 days) (P < 0.001). The annual median approval time in Canada increased in each of the 3 years. The approval times of priority-reviewed drugs in Canada were significantly longer than in the United States (median 317 vs 232 days) but significantly shorter than in Australia (509 days) (both comparisons, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall approval times of new drugs in Canada were longer than those in Australia, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the United States in the period studied. The findings warrant ongoing monitoring of Canadian drug approval times.

Public health implications of emerging vaccine technologies

The field of public health and medicine stands to benefit immensely from the emerging vaccine technologies and improved application of existing technologies. Technological advances may promote: (1) greater flexibility and simplicity in the design and operation of immunization campaigns or ongoing prevention programs, including reduction in number of vaccine doses, cold chain elimination, slow-release/prolonged antigenic stimulation, reduced cost and hazard and increased ease of administration through noninvasive, oral delivery systems, greater population levels of immunization and health; (2) the development of documents by FDA, WHO, and other regulatory authorities and groups, to assist the manufacturer in the appropriate manufacturing, preclinical, and clinical development of these new vaccines; (3) a greater array of vaccines to protect the civilian and military populations; (4) increased vaccine potency; (5) vaccines eliciting mucosal immunity, cytotoxic T cells, and/or neutralizing antibody. At the end of the 20th century there remain many unconquered pathogens and noninfectious indications for which medical science suggests that vaccines could be effective. New technologies may provide the best hope to address this wide array of public health needs.