Vaccine Approvals and the Role of the FDA Vaccine Advisory Committee, 2000-2019
0
Citation
22
Reference
10
Related Paper
Abstract:
Abstract Background The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) plays a critical role in bolstering public confidence in vaccines and the vaccine review process. An important tool for enhancing transparency and public trust is the FDA’s Vaccine and Biological Related Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC), a group of external experts that advises on scientific issues related to the licensure of vaccines. Objective To analyze key features of VRBPAC meetings convened over 20 years; estimate the probability of advisory committee review of newly approved vaccines, focusing on vaccines targeting emerging diseases; and examine the speed of and variance in approval times as a function of VRBPAC review. Methods Cross-sectional study of VRBPAC meetings convened and new vaccine licensure applications approved between January 1, 2000, and December 31, 2019. We analyzed the frequency of VRBPAC meetings and sessions; the percentage of newly licensed vaccines reviewed by VRBPAC; and the number of days between the submission of the licensure application and the date of FDA approval. Results Between 2000 and 2019, VRBPAC convened for a mean of 4.1 sessions per year. One-quarter of sessions was devoted to the review of specific vaccine products. During the same period, 44 new vaccine licensures were approved, 20% of which were for vaccines targeting emerging diseases. Almost half (48%) of successful new vaccine applications were reviewed by VRBPAC (n=21), a rate lower than for therapeutic applications. Among new applications targeting emerging diseases, 29% of non-influenza vaccines were reviewed by VRBPAC. There was no difference in the median time to approval as a function of VRBPAC review (364 days with VRBAC review vs. 365 days with no review, p=0.870). Conclusion The FDA has convened VRBPAC for reviews of about half of its vaccine products, less frequently for vaccines against non-influenza emerging diseases. There is considerable scope for the FDA to increase VRBPAC engagement in the vaccine review process.Keywords:
Advisory committee
Licensure
Drug approval
Advisory committee
Drug Administration
Cite
Citations (0)
Between 2011 and 2015, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved 170 new therapeutic agents, and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) approved 144. The times for those regulatory reviews were, on average, 60 days shorter at the FDA than at the EMA.
Drug approval
Approved drug
Clinical Research
Cite
Citations (54)
In 2001, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) launched numerous initiatives to assure the availability of medical products for the treatment of injuries that could be caused by terrorists using biologic, chemical, or nuclear agents.
Drug approval
Cite
Citations (1)
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is requesting nominations for membership on the Medical Radiation Advisory Committee. There is currently one vacancy on the committee and there will be three additional vacancies on June 30, 1985.
Advisory committee
Cite
Citations (0)
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the establishment by the Commissioner of Food and Drugs of the Medical Devices Advisory Committee and the termination of the existing devices panels. This document revises the agency's list of standing advisory committees to show these actions.
Advisory committee
Inspector general
Cite
Citations (0)
Drug approval
Medical device
Cite
Citations (345)
Peanut Allergy
Oral immunotherapy
Advisory committee
Oral food challenge
Cite
Citations (20)
This study reviewed transcripts of meetings of the Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee to the US Food and Drug Administration to characterize potential financial and other conflicts of interest of public speakers.
Advisory committee
Drug Administration
Drug approval
Cite
Citations (31)
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulates high-risk medical devices through the premarket approval (PMA) pathway, which requires clinical evidence assuring safety and effectiveness for approval.[1][1] After approval, manufacturers may face barriers to successful commercialization, such as
Drug approval
Medical device
Cite
Citations (0)
Concerns have been raised that regulatory programs to accelerate approval of cancer drugs in cancer may increase uncertainty about benefits and harms for survival and quality of life (QoL). We analyzed all pivotal clinical trials and all non-pivotal randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for all cancer drugs approved for the first time by the FDA between 2000 and 2020. We report regulatory and trial characteristics. Effects on overall survival (OS), progression-free survival and tumor response were summarized in meta-analyses. Effects on QoL were qualitatively summarized. Between 2000 and 2020, the FDA approved 145 novel cancer drugs for 156 indications based on 190 clinical trials. Half of indications (49%) were approved without RCT evidence; 82% had a single clinical trial only. OS was primary endpoint in 14% of trials and QoL data were available from 25%. The median OS benefit was 2.55 months (IQR, 1.33-4.28) with a mean hazard ratio for OS of 0.75 (95%CI, 0.72-0.79, I2 = 42). Improvement for QoL was reported for 7 (4%) of 156 indications. Over time, priority review was used increasingly and the mean number of trials per indication decreased from 1.45 to 1.12. More trials reported results on QoL (19% in 2000-2005; 41% in 2016-2020). For 21 years, novel cancer drugs have typically been approved based on one single, often uncontrolled, clinical trial, measuring surrogate endpoints. This leaves cancer patients without solid evidence that novel drugs improve their survival or QoL and there is no indication towards improvement.
Clinical endpoint
Surrogate endpoint
Cite
Citations (28)