Pink Sheet is part of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them. Informa PLC’s registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use. For high-quality copies or electronic reprints for distribution to colleagues or customers, please call +44 (0) 20 3377 3183

Printed By

UsernamePublicRestriction
UsernamePublicRestriction
Blue sky

FDA's decision-making can create lasting precedents, but also some that warrant re-examination.

A Matter Of Precedent: US FDA Sometimes Labors Under Weight Of Unpopular Or Unfavorable Decisions

Executive Summary

As agency observers wonder whether and how political considerations will impact the timing of a COVID-19 vaccine approval or authorization, the Pink Sheet looks at instances through the years where agency staffers found themselves operating under precedents with which they disagreed or that didn’t work out as expected.

You may also be interested in...



Plasma Authorization Raises Fears Of Politically-Influenced COVID-19 Vaccine Decisions, Compromised FDA

US FDA Commissioner Hahn’s credibility is in question following an emergency use authorization for convalescent plasma, leading some former officials to push for new agency leadership. Hahn’s actions, combined with President Trump’s attack on FDA staff as being deep state’ actors, may compromise the public trust in the agency’s work during COVID-19 and beyond, former FDA officials say.

Intercept CRL Likely About OCA-Specific Concerns, Not NASH Endpoints

The US FDA complete response letter for Intercept’s obeticholic acid raised speculation that the agency might be rethinking approvable endpoints for NASH. But analysts generally think OCA’s unspectacular efficacy data is behind the decision.

Hydroxychloroquine EUA Is First Rx Victim Of Hahn’s ‘Move Fast, Course Correct’ Philosophy

US FDA's decision to revoke the COVID-19 emergency use authorization for two anti-malarial drugs keeps with commissioner Hahn's stated goal of moving fast to tackle the pandemic, but shifting course as new data comes available. FDA cited new evidence as well as a reanalysis of the data it initially based the EUA on as reasons for pulling the authorization. Meanwhile, HHS Secretary Alex Azar appeared to equate the EUA revocation as opening the doors for broader use of the medicine, potentially undermining FDA's own communication on the drug, in yet another example of political leaders complicating the science and public health response to COVID-19.

UsernamePublicRestriction

Register

ID001014

Ask The Analyst

Please Note: You can also Click below Link for Ask the Analyst
Ask The Analyst

Your question has been successfully sent to the email address below and we will get back as soon as possible. my@email.address.

All fields are required.

Please make sure all fields are completed.

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please enter a valid e-mail address

Please enter a valid Phone Number

Ask your question to our analysts

Cancel