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

Beyond Individual Patients: FDA Emphasizes Public Health Role In Certain Benefit-Risk Decisions

Executive Summary

US FDA’s new draft guidance on benefit-risk assessments for new drugs highlights cases where it can take into account broader public health implications than just the pros and cons calculus for the patients described in a drug's label. While not a new policy perse, it is one the agency seems to have only grudgingly employed in the past.

You may also be interested in...



US FDA Likely To Leave Harder Decisions On COVID-19 Boosters To CDC

With potentially less flexibility and a simpler calculation on the benefit-risk of approving COVID vaccine boosters, FDA could punt the more challenging questions like whether boosters are needed now and for which populations, along with global equity and public health considerations to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices.

Pfizer Vaccine’s Benefit-Risk Assessment In Older Male Adolescents A Close Call Due To Myocarditis

For males 16-17 years old, excess cases of myocarditis/pericarditis from Comirnaty would exceed COVID-19 hospitalizations and deaths under ‘worst case’ scenario modeled by US FDA; agency nevertheless deemed approval warranted in this subpopulation, citing prevention of nonhospitalized COVID cases and public health benefits from vaccination.

FDA On What Aduhelm AdCom Got Wrong: Statistics, Investigational Drugs, Patient Perspective

After a searing advisory committee on aducanumab, FDA reviewers undertook an extensive effort to counter or discount the panel’s criticisms, newly released review documents show. Among the unusual moves by the agency was the citation of data from two investigational products, Lilly’s donanemab and Biogen/Eisai’s BAN2401, as evidence in support of aducanumab.

Related Content

Topics

Related Companies

UsernamePublicRestriction

Register

PS145024

Ask The Analyst

Ask the Analyst is free for subscribers.  Submit your question and one of our analysts will be in touch.

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