Accelerated Approvals Could Be Improved By Focusing On Benefit/Risk, Making Withdrawal Easier
Executive Summary
Applying the expedited pathway in the context of a preliminary benefit/risk assessment, rather than focusing solely on predictive surrogate or intermediate clinical endpoints, would give the US FDA more flexibility, Friends of Cancer Research working group says in a new white paper.
You may also be interested in...
Accelerated Approval: US FDA Wants Comprehensive Development Plan From Oncology Sponsors
Cancer drug developers should come to the agency early with a package of clinical trials to support accelerated approval and confirm clinical benefit rather than with plans to sequentially conduct such studies, Oncology Center of Excellence’s Richard Pazdur says; he also suggests closer scrutiny ahead of whether postmarketing trials are being conducted with ‘due diligence.’
US FDA Doesn’t Need Conditional Approval Pathway, Cavazzoni Tells House Committee
CDER director says agency has many tools to expedite development and does not endorse adding a pathway similar to EU’s conditional approval. Neurodegenerative diseases hearing in Energy & Commerce Committee focuses more on ALS than Aduhelm.
FDA’s Pazdur: Accelerated Approval Is ‘Under Attack,' Supporters Can’t Afford To Remain Silent
US FDA’s Oncology Center of Excellence Director and the National Institutes of Health National Cancer Institute Director defended the agency’s accelerated approval pathway, saying critics are missing the benefits reaped by many cancer patients. Pazdur worries pathway is at risk, unless champions work to counter critics.