Australian access to FDA-approved breakthrough therapy designation medicines: a 10-year review.

Background: Regulatory pathways adopted by the United States Food Drug and Administration (FDA) and Australian Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) enable expedited approval of medicines that are thought to offer significant clinical advantage over existing options for severe diseases. Objectives: To review Australian accessibility to medicines approved through the FDA breakthrough therapy designation (BTD) process including timelines and approvals by the TGA and Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee (PBAC) for listing on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS). Methods: Retrospective review of published reports from the FDA, TGA, PBAC and PBS for BTDs from 1 January 2013-31 August 2023. Uniform data about BTD and milestone dates were collected. Analysis included all BTDs approved by FDA until 31-August-2022. Main outcome measures: Rates of approval by TGA and PBAC, and PBS-listing; and median (interquartile range, IQR) time from FDA submission to FDA approval, and FDA approval to TGA approval, PBAC approval and PBS listing for cancer and non-cancer medicines. Results: Of 237 BTDs across 156 medicines, 68% were approved by the TGA, and 37% were listed on the PBS. Median (IQR) time from FDA submission to FDA approval was shorter for cancer compared to non-cancer; 179 days (140-210) vs 232 days (181-245), p < 0.02. Time from FDA approval to PBS listing was similar for cancer and non-cancer; median 744 days (IQR, 549-1136) and 733 days (IQR 440-960) respectively, with improvements for cancer BTDs noted for 2018-2022 compared to 2013-2017; 566 days (IQR 319-831) vs 880 days (IQR 620-1362), p < 0.02 but not for non-cancer BTDs. Conclusion: BTD medicines are accessible in Australia approximately 2 years after FDA approval. Since 2018, time to PBS listing for cancer therapies improved, mirroring shorter FDA approval times for this category. Further understanding of clinical studies and context by therapeutic area may improve timely and safe access to life-saving medicines.

Artificial intelligence integration in the drug lifecycle and in regulatory science: policy implications, challenges and opportunities.

Artificial intelligence tools promise transformative impacts in drug development. Regulatory agencies face challenges in integrating AI while ensuring reliability and safety in clinical trial approvals, drug marketing authorizations, and post-market surveillance. Incorporating these technologies into the existing regulatory framework and agency practices poses notable challenges, particularly in evaluating the data and models employed for these purposes. Rapid adaptation of regulations and internal processes is essential for agencies to keep pace with innovation, though achieving this requires collective stakeholder collaboration. This article thus delves into the need for adaptations of regulations throughout the drug development lifecycle, as well as the utilization of AI within internal processes of medicine agencies.

Comparative analysis of FDA approvals by top 20 pharma companies (2014-2023).

This article addresses the research and development (R&D) productivity challenge of the pharmaceutical industry, focusing on United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-related new drug approvals of the top 20 pharmaceutical companies (2014-2023). We evaluated the degree of innovation in new drugs to determine the innovativeness of these leading companies. A key finding of our analysis is the decline in the number of new drugs approved by the FDA for these leading companies over the investigated time period. This trend suggests that some of the leading companies are losing ground in R&D innovation, raising concerns about their ability to sustain competitive advantage, ensure long-term market success, and maintain viable business models.

From Drug Discovery to Drug Approval: A Comprehensive Review of the Pharmacogenomics Status Quo with a Special Focus on Egypt.

Pharmacogenomics (PGx) is the hope for the full optimization of drug therapy while minimizing the accompanying adverse drug events that cost billions of dollars annually. Since years before the century, it has been known that inter-individual variations contribute to differences in specific drug responses. It is the bridge to what is well-known today as "personalized medicine". Addressing the drug's pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics is one of the features of this science, owing to patient characteristics that vary on so many occasions. Mainly in the liver parenchymal cells, intricate interactions between the drug molecules and enzymes family of so-called "Cytochrome P450" occur which hugely affects how the body will react to the drug in terms of metabolism, efficacy, and safety. Single nucleotide polymorphisms, once validated for a transparent and credible clinical utility, can be used to guide and ensure the succession of the pharmacotherapy plan. Novel tools of pharmacoeconomics science are utilized extensively to assess cost-effective pharmacogenes preceding the translation to the bedside. Drug development and discovery incorporate a drug-gene perspective and save more resources. Regulations and laws shaping the clinical PGx practice can be misconceived; however, these pre-/post approval processes ensure the product's safety and efficacy. National and international regulatory agencies seek guidance on maintaining conduct in PGx practice. In this patient-centric era, social and legal considerations manifest in a way that makes them unavoidable, involving patients and other stakeholders in a deliberate journey toward utmost patient well-being. In this comprehensive review, we contemporarily addressed the scientific leaps in PGx, along with various challenges that face the proper implementation of personalized medicine in Egypt. These informative insights were drawn to serve what the Egyptian population, in particular, would benefit from in terms of knowledge and know-how while maintaining the latest global trends. Moreover, this review is the first to discuss various modalities and challenges faced in Egypt regarding PGx, which we believe could be used as a pilot piece of literature for future studies locally, regionally, and internationally.

The Impact of Previous Therapy on Overall-Survival in Registration Clinical Trials for 1st Line Metastatic Breast Cancer.

AIM: To explore the impact of previous treatment on the efficacy of investigational new drugs in registration trials for 1st line metastatic breast cancer (MBC). METHODS: Thirteen US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved indications for 1st line MBC between 1/2000-12/2023 were identified and their supporting publications were searched in the ClinicalTrials.gov and Google Scholar. Where available, hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for overall-survival (OS) were pooled into meta-analysis and the difference in the magnitude of OS benefit between treatment naïve and previously treated patients was analyzed. RESULTS: There was no difference in the magnitude of OS benefit between treatment-naïve and previously treated patients (HR=0.72 versus 0.80,p for difference=0.25). In indications for triple-negative BC, treatment-naïve patients had higher magnitude of OS benefit compared to previously treated patients (HR=0.53 versus 0.81,p=0.03). In indications for luminal disease, the magnitude of benefit was comparable between the subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: In trials supporting 1st line therapy for TNBC the magnitude of benefit is significantly higher in treatment naïve compared to previously treated patients. Our findings may represent a previously unrecognized bias, potentially over-estimating the benefit of triple-negative BC new drugs.

[Translated article] Characteristics, clinical benefit, and reimbursement of new authorisations for oncohaematology drugs in Spain between 2017 and 2020.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the authorisations and funding resolutions for new onco-haematological drugs in Spain between 2017 and 2020, as well as the results of their main trials. METHODS: Observational, cross-sectional, descriptive study conducted between October and December 2022. Onco-haematology drugs approved by the European Medicines Agency between 2017 and 2020 were included, according to EFPIA patients W.A.I.T Indicator 2021 Survey. Authorisation information was obtained from the main study of the European Public Assessment Report. Data were collected on medicines, their authorisation and main study, benefit shown, cost, and status and time to reimbursement. RESULTS: Forty-one new drugs authorised for 49 indications were identified. More than half (58.5%) were targeted therapies, and 61.2% were for the treatment of solid tumours (61.2%). Most had palliative intent (71.4%) and were indicated in relapsed or refractory disease (55.1%). Of the clinical trials, 57.1% were phase III and 63.3% were randomised. The primary endpoint was overall survival in 16.3%, increasing to 25.8% among randomised clinical trials. Regarding licensed drugs based on response rate, the median response rate was 56.4% [IQI 40-66.3]. In those authorised on the basis of surrogate time-to-event endpoints, the median hazard ratio was 0.54 [IQI 0.38-0.57], and among those using overall survival was 0.71 [IQI 0.59-0.77]. Globally, 22.4% had shown benefit in overall survival, with a median gain of 4 months [IQI 3.6-16.7]. One-third (33.3%) of the indications evaluable according to the European Society for Medical Oncology Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale showed substantial clinical benefit. Of the indications, 75.5% were funded, half (48.6%; 36.7% of the total) with restrictions. The median time to funding was 19.5 months [IQI 11.4-29.3]. CONCLUSIONS: Most main clinical trials of new onco-haematology drugs approved in Spain used surrogate primary endpoint and, at the time of authorisation, few had shown to prolong overall survival. More than a third were uncontrolled clinical trials.

Pharmaceutical company funding of cancer patient advocacy organizations in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: Financial conflicts of interest (FCOI) of medical professionals and associated organizations with pharmaceutical companies (pharma) might contribute to the use of low value oncological treatments. Value criteria for oncological drug approvals in the Netherlands have recently become more stringent leading to objections by cancer patient advocacy organizations (cPAOs). Considering the importance of cPAOs input in cancer patient care we analyzed whether pharma funding of cPAOs occurs in the Netherlands. METHODS: The cPAO websites and available annual reports were evaluated for disclosure of pharma funding for the years 2021 and 2022. Also, data from the Dutch Healthcare Transparency Registry (DHTR) were extracted. RESULTS: Twenty-one of 34 (61.8 %) cPAOs received pharma funding (with 20 registered in the DHTR), and for 13 (29.4 %) cPAOs no reporting of pharma funding could be found. Three of the cPAOs disclosed pharma funding directly on their main website. Online educational material was available from 22 cPAOs on their websites with pharma funding disclosed on the educational material in 5. The total registered amount of pharmaceutical funding was €667,232.00 in 2021 and €536,098.00 in 2022. The median (and interquartile ranges) DHTR registered amount of support per cPAO that received funding in the studied period was €23,799.50 (14,823.75-84,663.30). The most common funding category as defined in the DHTR was project sponsorship. CONCLUSIONS: Financial support by the pharmaceutical industry is common for Dutch cPAOs. Given the importance of cPAOs and their objective input in the societal debate on the availability of cancer drugs, the potential influence of pharma sponsoring should be critically evaluated.

Making Drug Approval Decisions in the Face of Uncertainty: Cumulative Evidence versus Value of Information.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic underscored the criticality and complexity of decision making for novel treatment approval and further research. Our study aims to assess potential decision-making methodologies, an evaluation vital for refining future public health crisis responses. METHODS: We compared 4 decision-making approaches to drug approval and research: the Food and Drug Administration's policy decisions, cumulative meta-analysis, a prospective value-of-information (VOI) approach (using information available at the time of decision), and a reference standard (retrospective VOI analysis using information available in hindsight). Possible decisions were to reject, accept, provide emergency use authorization, or allow access to new therapies only in research settings. We used monoclonal antibodies provided to hospitalized COVID-19 patients as a case study, examining the evidence from September 2020 to December 2021 and focusing on each method's capacity to optimize health outcomes and resource allocation. RESULTS: Our findings indicate a notable discrepancy between policy decisions and the reference standard retrospective VOI approach with expected losses up to $269 billion USD, suggesting suboptimal resource use during the wait for emergency use authorization. Relying solely on cumulative meta-analysis for decision making results in the largest expected loss, while the policy approach showed a loss up to $16 billion and the prospective VOI approach presented the least loss (up to $2 billion). CONCLUSION: Our research suggests that incorporating VOI analysis may be particularly useful for research prioritization and treatment implementation decisions during pandemics. While the prospective VOI approach was favored in this case study, further studies should validate the ideal decision-making method across various contexts. This study's findings not only enhance our understanding of decision-making strategies during a health crisis but also provide a potential framework for future pandemic responses. HIGHLIGHTS: This study reviews discrepancies between a reference standard (retrospective VOI, using hindsight information) and 3 conceivable real-time approaches to research-treatment decisions during a pandemic, suggesting suboptimal use of resources.Of all prospective decision-making approaches considered, VOI closely mirrored the reference standard, yielding the least expected value loss across our study timeline.This study illustrates the possible benefit of VOI results and the need for evidence accumulation accompanied by modeling in health technology assessment for emerging therapies.

Recent and anticipated novel drug approvals (Q2 2024 through Q1 2025).

PURPOSE: Health-system pharmacists play a crucial role in monitoring the pharmaceutical pipeline to manage formularies, allocate resources, and optimize clinical programs for new therapies. This article aims to support pharmacists by providing periodic updates on new and anticipated novel drug approvals. SUMMARY: Selected drug approvals anticipated in the 12-month period covering the second quarter of 2024 through the first quarter of 2025 are reviewed. The analysis emphasizes drugs expected to have significant clinical and financial impact in hospitals and clinics, as selected from 52 novel drugs awaiting US Food and Drug Administration approval. New cellular and gene therapies for cancers continued to strengthen the pipeline, in addition to new drugs targeting previously untreatable conditions. Several novel drugs are being developed for rare and ultra-rare diseases such as hemophilia, Niemann-Pick disease type C, hereditary angioedema, and aromatic l-amino acid decarboxylase deficiency. CONCLUSION: The current drug pipeline includes new drugs with various indications for cancers and rare diseases as well as diabetes, acute coronary syndrome, chronic skin disorder, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

A descriptive study of new drug approvals during 2017-2021 and disease morbidity and mortality patterns in India.

Aim: Studies show the presence of a mismatch between drug research and disease burden. A study conducted in the European Union found that new drug development was restricted to certain diseases. A study of biosimilar approvals in India found that 87% of drugs were for treating noncommunicable diseases. This study aimed to determine the new drugs approved in India from 2017 to 2021 and the top ten causes of morbidity and mortality and detect the presence of any discordance between these. Methods: A descriptive study was conducted using data on new drug approvals accessed from the Central Drugs Standard Control Organization website. The top ten causes of mortality and morbidity in India from 2015 to 2019 were identified from the Global Burden of Diseases database. Descriptive statistics were used to compare the drug approvals and the leading diseases. Results: One hundred twenty-six drugs were approved during the study period. Antineoplastic drugs constituted 19.84% of the approvals, antimicrobials 18.25%, and cardiovascular drugs 9.52%. Ischemic heart disease and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease were the two leading causes of morbidity and mortality. Diarrheal diseases, lower respiratory tract infection, and drug-susceptible tuberculosis were among the top ten causes. Ten antibacterials, including four antitubercular drugs, were approved during this period. Two drugs were approved for rare diseases. Conclusion: Our study showed that the drugs approved were largely in line with the prevalent disease burden, and there was no significant discordance observed. Some diseases, such as ischemic stroke/intracranial hemorrhage, require further efforts in bringing forth newer pharmacotherapy options.

Characteristics, clinical benefit and reimbursement of new authorisations for oncohaematology drugs in Spain between 2017 and 2020. / Características, beneficio clínico y financiación de las nuevas autorizaciones de fármacos oncohematológicos en España entre 2017 y 2020.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the authorisations and funding resolutions for new onco-hematological drugs in Spain between 2017 and 2020, as well as the results of their main trials. METHODS: Observational, cross-sectional, descriptive study conducted between October and December 2022. Onco-hematology drugs approved by the European Medicines Agency between 2017 and 2020 were included, according to EFPIA patients W.A.I.T Indicator 2021 Survey. Authorisation information was obtained from the main study of the European Public Assessment Report (EPAR). Data were collected on medicines, their authorisation and main study, benefit shown, cost, and status and time to reimbursement. RESULTS: Forty-one new drugs authorised for 49 indications were identified. More than half (58.5%) were targeted therapies, and 61.2% were for the treatment of solid tumors (61.2%). Most had palliative intent (71.4%) and were indicated in relapsed or refractory disease (55.1%). Of the clinical trials, 57.1% were phase III and 63.3% were randomised. The primary endpoint was overall survival in 16.3%, increasing to 25.8% among randomised clinical trials. Regarding licensed drugs based on response rate, the median response rate was 56.4% (IQI 40.0-66.3). In those authorised on the basis of surrogate time-to-event endpoints, the median Hazard Ratio was 0.54 (IQI 0.38-0.57), and among those using overall survival was 0.71 (IQI 0.59-0.77). Globally, 22.4% had shown benefit in overall survival, with a median gain of 4 months (IQI 3.6-16.7). One third (33.3%) of the indications evaluable according to the European Society for Medical Oncology Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale showed substantial clinical benefit. Of the indications, 75.5% were funded, half (48.6%; 36.7% of the total) with restrictions. The median time to funding was 19.5 months (IQI 11.4-29.3). CONCLUSIONS: Most main clinical trials of new onco-haematology drugs approved in Spain used surrogate primary endpoint and, at the time of authorisation, few had shown to prolong overall survival. More than a third were uncontrolled clinical trials.

Emerging pharmacotherapy for the treatment of cannabis use disorder.

INTRODUCTION: About one-fifth of cannabis users, the most commonly used illicit substance, have cannabis use disorder (CUD). Psychiatric disorders and suicide are more common in these patients, and the disability-adjusted life years were reported to be 0.69 million. Pharmacotherapy for CUD is an unmet public health need, as current evidence-based therapies have limited efficacy. AREAS COVERED: After explaining the pathophysiology of CUD, the effects of emerging pharmacological interventions in its treatment obtained from randomized controlled trials were reviewed in light of mechanisms of action. Superiority over control of cannabidiol, gabapentin, galantamine, nabilone plus zolpidem, nabiximols, naltrexone, PF-04457845, quetiapine, varenicline, and topiramate were observed through the cannabinoid, glutamatergic, γ-aminobutyric acidergic, serotonergic, noradrenergic, dopaminergic, opioidergic, and cholinergic systems. All medications were reported to be safe and tolerable. EXPERT OPINION: Adding pharmacotherapy to psychotherapy is the optimal treatment for CUD on a case-by-case basis. Drug development to add to psychotherapy is the main path, but time and cost suggest repurposing and repositioning existing drugs. Considering sample size, follow-up, and effect size, further studies using objective tools are necessary. The future of CUD treatment is promising.

Pathway to Approval of Innovative Radiopharmaceuticals in China.

Since the late 1950s, radiopharmaceuticals have been used for diagnosis and treatment in clinical nuclear medicine in China. Over the decades, China has successfully established a relatively sophisticated system for radiopharmaceutical production and management, supported by state-of-the-art facilities. With the rapid growth of the national economy, the radiopharmaceutical market in China is expanding at a remarkable pace. This burgeoning market has led to an escalating demand for clinical-stage radiopharmaceuticals, either produced domestically or imported. Despite this positive trajectory, the development and application of radiopharmaceuticals in China have been hindered by several challenges that persist, such as inadequate research, insufficient investment, limited availability of radionuclides, shortage of trained personnel in related fields, and imperfections in policies and regulations. In an exciting development, the regulation reforms implemented since 2015 have positively affected China's drug regulatory system. The introduction of the "Mid- and Long-Term Development Plan (2021-2035) for Medical Isotopes" created concurrently an opportune environment for the advancement of innovative radiopharmaceuticals. In this review, we aim to provide an overview of the approval process for novel radiopharmaceuticals by the National Medical Products Administration and the status of radiopharmaceuticals in research and development in China. Preclinical development and clinical translation of radiopharmaceuticals are undergoing rapid evolution in China. As practitioners in the field in China, we provide several practical suggestions to stimulate open discussions and thoughtful consideration.

An empirical analysis of overall survival in drug approvals by the US FDA (2006-2023).

BACKGROUND: The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has expanded the use of surrogate markers in drugs approved for oncology/hematology indications. This has likely resulted in a greater number of approvals and possibly drugs coming to market faster, but it is unknown whether these drugs also improve overall survival (OS) for patients taking them. METHODS: We sought to estimate the percentage of oncology drugs that have shown to improve OS in a cross-sectional analysis of US FDA oncology drug approvals (2006-2023). We searched for OS data in registration trials and the peer-reviewed literature. RESULTS: We found 392 oncology drug approvals. Eighty-seven (22%) drug approvals were based on OS, 147 drug approvals were later tested for OS benefit (38% of all approvals and 48% of drugs approved on a surrogate), and 130 (33%) have yet to be tested for OS benefit. Of the 147 drug approvals later tested for OS, 109 (28% of all approvals and 74% of drugs later tested for OS) have yet to show OS benefit, whereas 38 (10% of all approvals and 26% of drugs later tested for OS benefit) were later shown to have OS benefit. In total, 125 out of 392 (32%) drugs approved for any indication have been shown to improve OS benefit at some point, and 267 (68%) have yet to show approval. CONCLUSION: About 32% of all oncology drug approvals have evidence for an improvement in OS. Higher standards are needed in drug regulation to ensure that approved drugs are delivering better patient outcomes, specifically in regards to survival.

Cancer drug indication approvals in China and the United States: a comparison of approval times and clinical benefit, 2001-2020.

Background: Perceived delays in cancer drug approvals have been a major concern for policymakers in China. Policies have been implemented to accelerate the launch of new cancer drugs and indications. This study aimed to assess similarities and differences between China and the United States in the approvals, timing, and clinical benefit evidence of cancer drug indications between 2001 and 2020. Methods: This study retrospectively identified all cancer drugs and indications approved in both China and the United States from January 1st, 2001 to December 31, 2020, and described differences in approval times as well as in submission and review times. Information on the availability of overall survival benefit evidence by December 31, 2020, was collected. Univariate and multiple logistic regression analyses were used to assess whether evidence of benefit and other factors affected the propensity and timing of approvals of cancer drug indications in China. Findings: Between 2001 and 2020, 229 indications corresponding to 145 cancer drugs approved in the United States were identified. Of those, 80 indications (34.9%) were also approved in China by the end of 2020. Cancer drug indications were approved in China at a median of 1273.5 days after approval in the United States. The median submission and review time differences for cancer drug indications in China were 1198.0 days and 180.0 days respectively. Submission time differences accounted for most of the approval time differences (p < 0.001). Indications supported by overall survival benefit evidence had shorter median review time differences (145.0 days) than those without such evidence (235.0 days, p = 0.008). Indications with overall survival benefit evidence were 3.94 times more likely to be approved in China compared to those without such evidence (p = 0.001), controlling for approval year, cancer type, and the prevalence of cancer by site. Interpretation: FDA-approved cancer drug indications demonstrating a survival benefit were more likely to receive approvals in China with shorter regulatory review times compared to indications without such evidence. Given that manufacturer submission times were the main driver of cancer drug approval times in China, factors influencing submission timing should be explored. Funding: No funding.

[Translated article] Current situation and evolution of the availability of drugs in the pediatric population in Spain.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the characteristics of the new medicines approved in the pediatric population in the last 3 years, both those with studies only in the pediatric population and those that extend their indication in this population group, as well as the current situation in relation to their marketing and financing. METHODS: Descriptive observational study of all drugs that include an indication in the pediatric population in Spain (by extension of the indications of drugs already authorized or because they are new drugs that already include an indication in this population group), from January 2019 to March 2022. RESULTS: During the study period, 129 drugs included their indication in the pediatric population. 13.9% of them are not marketed, 46.5% are in a situation of non-financing, under study or without a request for financing, and 4.6% are financed for a specific pediatric subpopulation. 52.7% are original drugs, 4.7% are generic, 38.8% are biological, 3.8% are biosimilar, and 17.8% are orphan drugs. 57.36% of these medicines obtain the pediatric indication due to extension of the indication and 42.64% obtain it because they are new medicines that already include their studies in the pediatric population. CONCLUSIONS: Drugs with authorized indications are increasingly available in the pediatric population and the trend is to extend the indication of authorized drugs to the adult population. However, barriers in terms of financing and marketing need to be expedite and overcome to facilitate access to them.

Different Development Strategies Affecting Japan's Drug lag between Japan-Based and Foreign-Based Companies.

We examined the development strategies of new molecular entities approved during a 10-year period (fiscal years of 2012-2021) in Japan to determine the differences in drug lag between Japan and foreign companies. The results demonstrated a clear difference in development strategies. For example, products were usually developed through a "only-Japan" strategy by Japan companies (51.1% of products), compared to a "MRCT (multi-regional clinical trials)" strategy by foreign companies (54.9% of products). Regarding types of licenses, for Japan companies, the percentage of original products was higher in the category of less drug lag, such as "no approval in the US and EU" (59.1%), whereas the percentage of "license-in" products was markedly higher in the "drug lag ≥ 5 years" category (52.5%). Such differences were not observed for products developed by foreign companies. Of 64 license-in products developed by Japan companies with a drug lag > 5 years, 51 (79.7%) had already been approved in the US or EU at initiation of clinical development in Japan. The origin of approximately half (34) of the products was from the emerging companies (non-member foreign companies of the Japan Pharmaceutical Manufacture Association). These results suggest that more global cooperation of Japan companies, particularly with emerging foreign companies, is necessary in terms of the earlier timing of license-in and development strategies of products to promote drug development without drug lag or drug loss in Japan.

Toward Patient-Centered Drug Approval for Treatment of Rare Diseases.

OBJECTIVES: This commentary seeks to improve the design and analysis of trials undertaken to obtain approval of drugs for treatment of rare diseases. METHODS: Methodological analysis reveals that use of hypothesis testing in the Food and Drug Administration drug approval process is harmful. Conventional asymmetric error probabilities bias the approval process against approval of new drugs. Hypothesis testing is inattentive to the relative magnitudes of losses to patient welfare when types 1 and 2 errors occur. Requiring the sample size to be large enough to guarantee the specified statistical power particularly inhibits the development of new drugs for treating rare diseases. Rarity of a disease makes it difficult to enroll the number of trial subjects needed to meet the statistical power standards for drug approval. RESULTS: Use of statistical decision theory in drug approval would overcome these serious deficiencies of hypothesis testing. Sample size would remain relevant to drug approval, but the criterion used to evaluate sample size would change. Rather than judging sample size by statistical power, the Food and Drug Administration could require a sample to be large enough to provide a specified nearness to optimality of the approval decision. CONCLUSIONS: Using nearness to optimality to set sample size and making approval decisions to minimize distance from optimality would particularly benefit the evaluation of drugs for treatment of rare diseases. It would enable a dramatic reduction in sample size relative to current norms, without compromising the clinical informativeness of trials.

Regulatory Considerations in the Approval of Rezafungin (Rezzayo) for the Treatment of Candidemia and Invasive Candidiasis in Adults.

On 22 March 2023, the FDA approved rezafungin (Rezzayo) for the treatment of candidemia and invasive candidiasis in adults with limited or no alternative treatment options. Rezafungin is an echinocandin that supports weekly dosing, enabling outpatient parenteral treatment that potentially avoids the need for a central venous catheter. Approval of rezafungin was based on a single adequate and well-controlled phase 3 study designed with a day 30 all-cause mortality primary end point and 20% noninferiority margin, which demonstrated that rezafungin is noninferior to the comparator echinocandin. Nonclinical studies of rezafungin in nonhuman primates identified a neurotoxicity safety signal; however, rezafungin's safety profile in the completed clinical studies was similar to other Food and Drug Administration-approved echinocandins. Here we describe the rationale for this approval and important considerations during the review process for a flexible development program intended to expedite the availability of antimicrobial therapies to treat serious infections in patients with limited treatment options. Clinical Trials Registration . NCT02734862 and NCT03667690.