Literature DB >> 20118413

Review of oncology and hematology drug product approvals at the US Food and Drug Administration between July 2005 and December 2007.

Rajeshwari Sridhara1, John R Johnson, Robert Justice, Patricia Keegan, Aloka Chakravarty, Richard Pazdur.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The Office of Oncology Drug Products (OODP) in the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research at the US Food and Drug Administration began reviewing marketing applications for oncological and hematologic indications in July 2005. We conducted an overview of products that were reviewed by the OODP for marketing approval and the regulatory actions taken during July 2005 to December 2007.
METHODS: We identified all applications that were reviewed by the OODP from July 1, 2005, through December 31, 2007, and reviewed the actions that OODP took. We also sought the basis for the actions taken, including the clinical trial design, endpoints used, patient accrual in the trial(s) supporting approval, and the type of regulatory approval.
RESULTS: During the study period, the OODP reviewed marketing applications for 60 new indications and took regulatory action on 58 indications. Regulatory action was based on a risk-benefit evaluation of the data submitted with each application. Products that demonstrated efficacy and had an acceptable risk-benefit ratio were granted either regular or accelerated marketing approval for use in the specific indication that was studied. Regular approval was based on endpoints that demonstrated that the drug provided clinical benefit as evidenced by a longer or better life or a favorable effect on an established surrogate for a longer or better life. Accelerated approval was based on a less well-established surrogate endpoint that was reasonably likely to predict a longer or better life. Of the 53 new indications that were approved during the study period, 39 received regular approval, nine received accelerated approval, and five were converted from accelerated to regular approval. Five applications were not approved, and two applications were withdrawn before any regulatory action was taken. Eighteen of the 53 indications that were approved were for new molecular entities.
CONCLUSION: During the study period, regulatory action was taken on 58 of the 60 marketing applications. Fifty-three applications were approved. A variety of clinical trial endpoints were used in the approval trials.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20118413     DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djp515

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst        ISSN: 0027-8874            Impact factor:   13.506


  31 in total

1.  The cost-utility of adjuvant chemotherapy using docetaxel and cyclophosphamide compared with doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide in breast cancer.

Authors:  T Younis; D Rayson; C Skedgel
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 3.677

Review 2.  Raising the bar: the curative potential of human cancer immunotherapy.

Authors:  Steven A Rosenberg
Journal:  Sci Transl Med       Date:  2012-03-28       Impact factor: 17.956

3.  Adjuvant trastuzumab for breast cancer: uncertainties in clinical and economic evidence following early stopping of the HERA trial.

Authors:  Tallal Younis; Chris Skedgel
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 4.  An empirical review of major legislation affecting drug development: past experiences, effects, and unintended consequences.

Authors:  Aaron S Kesselheim
Journal:  Milbank Q       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 4.911

5.  Progression-free survival versus overall survival in ovarian cancer: where are we now?

Authors:  Susana Banerjee; Stan Kaye
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 5.075

6.  Overall survival should be the primary endpoint in clinical trials for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

Authors:  P K Cheema; R L Burkes
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 3.677

7.  The evolution of Reference Drug Lists and Clinical Practice Guidelines in the public health system of a middle-income country.

Authors:  Israel Rico-Alba; Albert Figueras
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2014-08       Impact factor: 4.335

8.  Failing to improve overall survival because post-protocol survival is long: fact, myth, excuse or improper study design?

Authors:  Vinay Prasad; Andrae Vandross
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  2014-01-29       Impact factor: 4.553

Review 9.  Regulatory approval pathways for anticancer drugs in Japan, the EU and the US.

Authors:  Sumimasa Nagai; Keiya Ozawa
Journal:  Int J Hematol       Date:  2016-04-15       Impact factor: 2.490

Review 10.  Assessment of benefits and risks in development of targeted therapies for cancer--The view of regulatory authorities.

Authors:  Francesco Pignatti; Bertil Jonsson; Gideon Blumenthal; Robert Justice
Journal:  Mol Oncol       Date:  2014-10-16       Impact factor: 6.603

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.