Comparative Effectiveness Reaches Into Drug Reviews, FDA Documents Show
This article was originally published in Pharmaceutical Approvals Monthly
Executive Summary
As the health care reform debate focuses on the appropriate role of comparative effectiveness research, a look at FDA’s review practices gives some insight into how the agency already takes the concept into account in its review decisions.
You may also be interested in...
AstraZeneca's Motavizumab May Be The Canary In The Follow-On Coal Mine
When a significant drug application hits a snag, it can sometimes feel like the whole industry stumbles. Such is the case with AstraZeneca PLC’s motavizumab, which protects against the effects of respiratory syncytial virus and recently failed to get a timely regulatory approval. This suggests the government agency’s standards may be changing on a range of issues, from comparative effectiveness to data integrity.
AstraZeneca's Motavizumab May Be The Canary In The Follow-On Coal Mine
When a significant drug application hits a snag, it can sometimes feel like the whole industry stumbles. Such is the case with AstraZeneca PLC’s motavizumab, which protects against the effects of respiratory syncytial virus and recently failed to get a timely regulatory approval. This suggests the government agency’s standards may be changing on a range of issues, from comparative effectiveness to data integrity.
Would AstraZeneca Be Better Off If Rezield Had Gotten A Harsher FDA Letter?
AstraZeneca subsidiary MedImmune received a "complete response" letter from FDA for its RSV drug motavizumab that did not request additional clinical data, but after an unfavorable advisory committee a year and a half later, the company is looking at the prospect of having to do another trial anyway