Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 16.201
Filtrar
1.
Health Res Policy Syst ; 20(1): 4, 2022 Jan 06.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34991612

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The pharmaceutical industry is heavily regulated. Partly for this reason, new drugs generally take over 10 years from the product development stage to market entry. Although regulations affect the pharmaceutical industry over a long period, previous studies investigating the impact of new regulatory policies have usually focused on the short period before and after implementing that policy. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to examine whether and how significantly regulatory policies affect long-term innovation in the pharmaceutical industry in Korea. METHODS: This study focused on three significant regulatory policies: the introduction of the product patent system, changes in the Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) system, and the Drug Expenditure Rationalization Plan (DERP). The study used interrupted time series (ITS) analysis to investigate the long-term impacts of the policies before and after implementation. RESULTS: Our results show that introducing the product patent system in 1987 significantly increased the number of Korean patent applications. The effect of the revised GMP policies was also statistically significant, both before and after implementation and between pre-emptive companies and non-pre-emptive ones. However, due to the companies' negotiations with the regulatory authorities or the regulatory system that links drug approval and price evaluation, the DERP did not significantly delay new drug registration in Korea. CONCLUSION: This study showed that the policies of the product patent system, GMP policies, and DERP regulations have significantly encouraged pharmaceutical companies to strive to meet regulatory requirements and promote innovation in Korea. The study suggests that it is necessary for companies to pre-emptively respond to systemic changes in development and production strategies to deal with regulatory changes and achieve sustainable growth. Also, our study results indicate that since government policies motivate the innovative system of the pharmaceutical industry, governmental authorities, when formulating pharmaceutical policies, need to consider the impact on the long-term innovation of the industry.


Assuntos
Aprovação de Drogas , Indústria Farmacêutica , Comércio , Estudos Longitudinais , República da Coreia
2.
Med Sci Monit ; 28: e935952, 2022 Jan 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34972812

RESUMO

On 4th November 2021, the first oral antiviral drug for COVID-19, molnupiravir (Lagevrio®), received full regulatory approval from the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) in the UK. Molnupiravir is an orally bioavailable antiviral drug for use at home when a SARS-CoV-2 test is positive. On 22nd December 2022, the FDA granted emergency use authorization (EUA) for the oral antiviral drug, nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (Paxlovid®) for adults and children with mild and moderate COVID-19 at increased risk of progression to severe COVID-19. These regulatory drug approvals come at a crucial time when new variants of concern of the SARS-CoV-2 virus are spreading rapidly. Although the FDA approved remdesivir (Veklury®) on 22nd October 2020 for use in adults and children for the treatment of COVID-19 requiring hospitalization, its use has been limited by the requirement for intravenous administration in a healthcare facility. The four FDA-approved therapeutic neutralizing monoclonal antibodies, imdevimab, bamlanivimab, etesevimab, and casirivimab are costly and also require medically-supervised intravenous administration. The availability of effective, low-cost oral antiviral drugs available in a community setting that can be used at an early stage of SARS-CoV-2 infection is now a priority in controlling COVID-19. An increasing number of repurposed antiviral drugs are currently under investigation or in the early stages of regulatory approval. This Editorial aims to present an update on the current status of orally bioavailable antiviral drug treatments for SARS-CoV-2 infection.


Assuntos
Antivirais/uso terapêutico , COVID-19/tratamento farmacológico , Citidina/análogos & derivados , Hidroxilaminas/uso terapêutico , Administração Oral , Anticorpos Monoclonais/uso terapêutico , Citidina/uso terapêutico , Aprovação de Drogas , Reposicionamento de Medicamentos/tendências , Humanos , Lactamas/uso terapêutico , Leucina/uso terapêutico , Nitrilas/uso terapêutico , Prolina/uso terapêutico , Ritonavir/uso terapêutico , SARS-CoV-2/efeitos dos fármacos , SARS-CoV-2/patogenicidade , Estados Unidos , United States Food and Drug Administration
3.
J Oncol Pharm Pract ; 28(1): 185-189, 2022 Jan.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34565230

RESUMO

Biological products may be used to diagnose, prevent, treat, and cure diseases and medical conditions, including cancer. Biosimilar agents, approved under an abbreviated 351(k) pathway, continue to increase in number and market share for biologic agents, especially for cancer care. Although biosimilars offer the potential for improved access to care, their introduction to the marketplace has created significant disruption. It is imperative that health systems providing care to patients with cancer develop a well-defined process to address the challenges associated with biosimilars. This descriptive article outlines pharmacy considerations for biosimilars and describes the current practices at The Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute at The Ohio State University. Biosimilars have and will continue to significantly impact oncology care. Organizations must understand the clinical, operational, and financial challenges associated with the use of these products.


Assuntos
Medicamentos Biossimilares , Neoplasias , Assistência Farmacêutica , Farmácias , Farmácia , Medicamentos Biossimilares/uso terapêutico , Aprovação de Drogas , Humanos , Oncologia , Neoplasias/tratamento farmacológico
4.
JAMA Netw Open ; 4(12): e2138793, 2021 12 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34905002

RESUMO

Importance: Both novel and next-in-class cancer drugs have a role in oncology, but the relative development of each is understudied. Objective: To characterize the mechanisms of action of anticancer drugs approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) between 2009 and 2020, noting how many approvals were based on a new mechanism of action vs next-in-class approvals. Design, Study, and Participants: This cross-sectional study included all anticancer drugs approved by the FDA from January 2009 to December 2020. The mechanism of action of each drug was extracted from FDA labels. Supportive-care treatments were excluded. Exposures: Name of drug approved, date of approval, indication, tumor type, mechanism of action, broad pharmaceutical class, and biological target. Approvals considering all tumor types and each tumor type separately were classified in 3 nonoverlapping categories: new mechanism of action, next in class, or subsequent approval. Main Outcomes and Measures: The number of all approvals each year; the number of approvals based on a new mechanism of action, either by drug (considering all tumor types) or by indication (considering tumor types separately); and the frequency of these numbers over time. Results: Overall, 332 approvals were included. Between 2009 and 2020, there was an increase in the total number of approvals from 8 to 57. We found that 209 approvals (63%) were for a next-in-class indication in a new tumor type (84 [25%]) or a subsequent indication of the same drug in the same tumor type (195 [59%]). When considering each tumor type separately, 123 approvals (37%) were based on a new mechanism of action. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, approvals based on a new mechanism of action represented a minority of all approvals. Further consideration of incentives for drug development are needed to prioritize novel or highly innovative and transformative anticancer drugs.


Assuntos
Antineoplásicos/farmacologia , Aprovação de Drogas/estatística & dados numéricos , United States Food and Drug Administration , Antineoplásicos/classificação , Antineoplásicos/normas , Estudos Transversais , Aprovação de Drogas/métodos , Humanos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Estados Unidos
7.
PLoS One ; 16(12): e0261478, 2021.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34919568

RESUMO

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) allows patients with serious illnesses to access investigational drugs for "compassionate use" outside of clinical trials through expanded access (EA) Programs. The federal Right-to-Try Act created an additional pathway for non-trial access to experimental drugs without institutional review board or FDA approval. This removal of oversight amplifies the responsibility of physicians, but little is known about the role of practicing physicians in non-trial access to investigational drugs. We undertook semi-structured interviews to capture the experiences and opinions of 21 oncologists all with previous EA experience at a major cancer center. We found five main themes. Participants with greater EA experience reported less difficulty accessing drugs through the myriad of administrative processes and drug company reluctance to provide investigational products while newcomers reported administrative hurdles. Oncologists outlined several rationales patients offered when seeking investigational drugs, including those with stronger health literacy and a good scientific rationale versus others who remained skeptical of conventional medicine. Participants reported that most patients had realistic expectations while some had unrealistic optimism. Given the diverse reasons patients sought investigational drugs, four factors-scientific rationale, risk-benefit ratio, functional status of the patient, and patient motivation-influenced oncologists' decisions to request compassionate use drugs. Physicians struggled with a "right-to-try" framing of patient access to experimental drugs, noting instead their own responsibility to protect patients' best interest in the uncertain and risky process of off-protocol access. This study highlights the willingness of oncologists at a major cancer center to pursue non-trial access to experimental treatments for patients while also shedding light on the factors they use when considering such treatment. Our data reveal discrepancies between physicians' sense of patients' expectations and their own internal sense of professional obligation to shepherd a safe process for patients at a vulnerable point in their care.


Assuntos
COVID-19/tratamento farmacológico , Ensaios de Uso Compassivo , Drogas em Investigação/uso terapêutico , Neoplasias/tratamento farmacológico , Oncologistas/psicologia , Terapias em Estudo , Aprovação de Drogas , Humanos , Entrevistas como Assunto , Motivação , Direitos do Paciente , Relações Médico-Paciente , Estados Unidos
8.
Multimedia | Recursos Multimídia | ID: multimedia-9321

RESUMO

O premiado diretor Adam Wishart autorizou a Colabore com o Futuro a legendar e divulgar no Brasil o documentário "O Preço da Vida" (The Price of Life). Nesse filme patrocinado pela BBC Two, Adam mostra como foi feita a decisão sobre a incorporação do Lenalidomida (importante medicamento para mieloma múltiplo) pela NICE (Agência Sanitária do Reino Unido). Muito interessante assistir para entender melhor como funciona o processo de ATS - Avaliação de Novas Tecnologias - sob o aspecto do paciente que precisa do medicamento, do governo que tem um orçamento limitado, e do fabricante, que tem um custo alto para produzir a droga e por isso precisa cobrar caro pela mesma. Os conflitos muito humanos que surgem abrem para debate uma questão moral maior - quanto vale a vida e quanto deve pagar a sociedade?


Assuntos
Mieloma Múltiplo/tratamento farmacológico , Lenalidomida/uso terapêutico , Política Nacional de Medicamentos , Assistência Farmacêutica/legislação & jurisprudência , Custos de Cuidados de Saúde , Gastos Públicos com Saúde/políticas , Vigilância Sanitária , Aprovação de Drogas/legislação & jurisprudência , Reino Unido , Documentários Cinematográficos , Indústria Farmacêutica/economia , Acesso aos Serviços de Saúde , Preço de Medicamento
9.
Trials ; 22(1): 817, 2021 Nov 17.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34789308

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Selective registration, publication, and outcome reporting of clinical trials distort the primary clinical evidence that is available to patients and clinicians regarding the safety and efficacy of US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved medical devices. The purpose of this study is to compare registration, publication, and outcome reporting among pivotal clinical trials that supported FDA approval of high-risk (class III) cardiovascular devices before and after the FDA Amendment Act (FDAAA) was enacted in 2007. METHODS: Using publicly available data from ClinicalTrials.gov , FDA summaries, and PubMed, we determined registration, publication, and reporting of findings for all pivotal clinical studies supporting FDA approval of new high-risk cardiovascular devices between 2005 and 2020, before and after FDAAA. For published studies, we compared both the primary efficacy outcome with the FDA's Premarket Approval (PMA) primary efficacy outcome and the published interpretation of findings with the FDA reviewer's interpretation (positive, equivocal, or negative). RESULTS: Between 2005 and 2020, the FDA approved 156 high-risk cardiovascular devices on the basis of 165 pivotal trials, 48 (29%) of which were categorized as pre-FDAAA and 117 (71%) as post-FDAAA. Post-FDAAA, pivotal clinical trials were more likely to be registered (115 of 117 (98%) vs 24 of 48 (50%); p < 0.001), to report results (98 of 117 (87%) vs 7 of 48 (15%); p < 0.001) on ClinicalTrials.gov , and to be published (100 or 117 (85%) vs 28 of 48 (58%); p < 0.001) in peer-reviewed literature when compared to pre-FDAAA. Among published trials, rates of concordant primary efficacy outcome reporting were not significantly different between pre-FDAAA trials and post-FDAAA trials (24 of 28 (86%) vs 96 of 100 (96%); p = 0.07), nor were rates of concordant trial interpretation (27 of 28 (96%) vs 93 of 100 (93%); p = 0.44). CONCLUSIONS: FDAAA was associated with increased registration, result reporting, and publication for trials supporting FDA approval of high-risk medical devices. Among published trials, rates of accurate primary efficacy outcome reporting and trial interpretation were high and no different post-FDAAA.


Assuntos
Revisão por Pares , Relatório de Pesquisa , Aprovação de Drogas , Humanos , PubMed , Estados Unidos , United States Food and Drug Administration
10.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 70(45): 1579-1583, 2021 Nov 12.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34758012

RESUMO

The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 (BNT162b2) vaccine is a lipid nanoparticle-formulated, nucleoside-modified mRNA vaccine encoding the prefusion spike glycoprotein of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. On August 23, 2021, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved a Biologics License Application (BLA) for use of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, marketed as Comirnaty (Pfizer, Inc.), in persons aged ≥16 years (1). The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine is also recommended for adolescents aged 12-15 years under an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) (1). All persons aged ≥12 years are recommended to receive 2 doses (30 µg, 0.3 mL each), administered 3 weeks apart (2,3). As of November 2, 2021, approximately 248 million doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine had been administered to persons aged ≥12 years in the United States.* On October 29, 2021, FDA issued an EUA amendment for a new formulation of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine for use in children aged 5-11 years, administered as 2 doses (10 µg, 0.2 mL each), 3 weeks apart (Table) (1). On November 2, 2021, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) issued an interim recommendation† for use of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine in children aged 5-11 years for the prevention of COVID-19. To guide its deliberations regarding recommendations for the vaccine, ACIP used the Evidence to Recommendation (EtR) Framework§ and incorporated a Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.¶ The ACIP recommendation for the use of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine in children aged 5-11 years under an EUA is interim and will be updated as additional information becomes available. The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine has high efficacy (>90%) against COVID-19 in children aged 5-11 years, and ACIP determined benefits outweigh risks for vaccination. Vaccination is important to protect children against COVID-19 and reduce community transmission of SARS-CoV-2.


Assuntos
Vacinas contra COVID-19/administração & dosagem , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto , Comitês Consultivos , COVID-19/epidemiologia , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. , Criança , Aprovação de Drogas , Humanos , Imunização/normas , Esquemas de Imunização , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , United States Food and Drug Administration
11.
Curr Protoc ; 1(11): e273, 2021 Nov.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34780124

RESUMO

Despite improved knowledge regarding disease causality, new drug targets, and enabling technologies, the attrition rate for compounds entering clinical trials has remained consistently high for several decades, with an average 90% failure rate. These failures are manifested in an inability to reproduce efficacy findings from animal models in humans and/or the occurrence of unexpected safety issues, and reflect failures in T1 translation. Similarly, an inability to sequentially demonstrate compound efficacy and safety in Phase IIa, IIb, and III clinical trials represents failures in T2 translation. Accordingly, T1 and T2 translation are colloquially termed 'valleys of death'. Since T2 translation dealt almost exclusively with clinical trials, T3 and T4 translational steps were added, with the former focused on facilitating interactions between laboratory- and population-based research and the latter on 'real world' health outcomes. Factors that potentially lead to T1/T2 compound attrition include: the absence of biomarkers to allow compound effects to be consistently tracked through development; a lack of integration/'de-siloing' of the diverse discipline-based and technical skill sets involved in drug discovery; the industrialization of drug discovery, which via volume-based goals often results in quantity being prioritized over quality; inadequate project governance and strategic oversight; and flawed decision making based on unreliable/irreproducible or incomplete data. A variety of initiatives have addressed this problem, including the NIH National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS), which has focused on bringing an unbiased academic perspective to translation, to potentially revitalize the process. This commentary provides an overview of the basic concepts involved in translation, along with suggested changes in the conduct of biomedical research to avoid valleys of death, including the use of Translational Scoring as a tool to avoid translational attrition and the impact of the FDA Accelerated Approval Pathway in lowering the hurdle for drug approval. © 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC.


Assuntos
Pesquisa Biomédica , Descoberta de Drogas , Animais , Aprovação de Drogas , Sistemas de Liberação de Medicamentos , Humanos , Projetos de Pesquisa
15.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 70(44): 1545-1552, 2021 Nov 05.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34735422

RESUMO

Three COVID-19 vaccines are currently approved under a Biologics License Application (BLA) or authorized under an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and recommended for primary vaccination by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) in the United States: the 2-dose mRNA-based Pfizer-BioNTech/Comirnaty and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines and the single-dose adenovirus vector-based Janssen (Johnson & Johnson) COVID-19 vaccine (1,2) (Box 1). In August 2021, FDA amended the EUAs for the two mRNA COVID-19 vaccines to allow for an additional primary dose in certain immunocompromised recipients of an initial mRNA COVID-19 vaccination series (1). During September-October 2021, FDA amended the EUAs to allow for a COVID-19 vaccine booster dose following a primary mRNA COVID-19 vaccination series in certain recipients aged ≥18 years who are at increased risk for serious complications of COVID-19 or exposure to SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19), as well as in recipients aged ≥18 years of Janssen COVID-19 vaccine (1) (Table). For the purposes of these recommendations, an additional primary (hereafter additional) dose refers to a dose of vaccine administered to persons who likely did not mount a protective immune response after initial vaccination. A booster dose refers to a dose of vaccine administered to enhance or restore protection by the primary vaccination, which might have waned over time. Health care professionals play a critical role in COVID-19 vaccination efforts, including for primary, additional, and booster vaccination, particularly to protect patients who are at increased risk for severe illness and death.


Assuntos
Comitês Consultivos , Vacinas contra COVID-19/administração & dosagem , Imunização/normas , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto , Adolescente , Adulto , Sistemas de Notificação de Reações Adversas a Medicamentos , Idoso , COVID-19/epidemiologia , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Vacinas contra COVID-19/efeitos adversos , Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. , Aprovação de Drogas , Humanos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , United States Food and Drug Administration , Adulto Jovem
17.
J Mol Model ; 27(11): 312, 2021 Oct 02.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34601658

RESUMO

A novel coronavirus known as severe acute respiratory syndrome is rapidly spreading worldwide. The international health authorities are putting all their efforts on quick diagnosis and placing the patients in quarantine. Although different vaccines have come for quick use as prophylactics, drug repurposing seems to be of paramount importance because of inefficient therapeutic options and clinical trial limitations. Here, we used structure-based drug designing approach to find and check the efficacy of the possible drug that can inhibit coronavirus main protease which is involved in polypeptide processing to functional protein. We performed virtual screening, molecular docking and molecular dynamics simulations of the FDA-approved drugs against the main protease of SARS-CoV-2. Using well-defined computational methods, we identified amprenavir, cefoperazone, riboflavin, diosmin, nadide and troxerutin approved for human therapeutic uses, as COVID-19 main protease inhibitors. These drugs bind to the SARS-CoV-2 main protease conserved residues of substrate-binding pocket and formed a remarkable number of non-covalent interactions. We have found diosmin as an inhibitor which binds covalently to the COVID-19 main protease. This study provides enough evidences for therapeutic use of these drugs in controlling COVID-19 after experimental validation and clinical demonstration.


Assuntos
Antivirais/farmacologia , COVID-19/tratamento farmacológico , Reposicionamento de Medicamentos , Inibidores de Proteases/farmacologia , SARS-CoV-2/efeitos dos fármacos , COVID-19/virologia , Aprovação de Drogas , Humanos , Simulação de Acoplamento Molecular , Simulação de Dinâmica Molecular , Estados Unidos , United States Food and Drug Administration
19.
Front Immunol ; 12: 683694, 2021.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34630379

RESUMO

Auranofin is an FDA-approved disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug that has been used for decades for treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. This gold(I) compound has anti-inflammatory properties because it reduces IL-6 expression via inhibition of the NF-κB-IL-6-STAT3 signaling pathway. Also, by inhibiting redox enzymes such as thioredoxin reductase, auranofin increases cellular oxidative stress and promotes apoptosis. Auranofin also possesses antiviral properties. Recently, it was reported that auranofin reduced by 95% SARS-CoV-2 RNA in infected human cells in vitro and decreased SARS-CoV-2-induced cytokine expression, including IL-6. During SARS-CoV-2 infection, a cytokine storm involving IL-6 increases severity of illness and worsens prognosis. Therefore, auranofin could, in our point of view, reduce pathology due to SARS-CoV-2-induced IL-6. COVID-19 is a rapidly-evolving respiratory disease now distributed worldwide. Strikingly high numbers of new COVID-19 cases are reported daily. We have begun a race to vaccinate people, but due to the complex logistics of this effort, the virus will continue to spread before all humans can be immunized, and new variants that may be less well contained by current vaccines are of concern. The COVID-19 pandemic has overwhelmed health care systems and new treatments to reduce mortality are urgently needed. We encourage to further evaluate the potential of auranofin in the treatment of COVID-19 in vitro and in animal models of SARS-CoV-2 infection and, if preliminary data are promising, in clinical trials with COVID-19 patients. In our opinion, auranofin has the potential to become a valuable addition to available therapies in this pandemic.


Assuntos
Antirreumáticos/uso terapêutico , Artrite Reumatoide/tratamento farmacológico , Auranofina/uso terapêutico , COVID-19/tratamento farmacológico , SARS-CoV-2/fisiologia , Síndrome da Liberação de Citocina , Aprovação de Drogas , Humanos , Interleucina-6/metabolismo , Tiorredoxinas/metabolismo
20.
Molecules ; 26(19)2021 Sep 27.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34641391

RESUMO

The large number of emerging antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) for cancer therapy has resulted in a significant market 'boom', garnering worldwide attention. Despite ADCs presenting huge challenges to researchers, particularly regarding the identification of a suitable combination of antibody, linker, and payload, as of September 2021, 11 ADCs have been granted FDA approval, with eight of these approved since 2017 alone. Optimism for this therapeutic approach is clear, despite the COVID-19 pandemic, 2020 was a landmark year for deals and partnerships in the ADC arena, suggesting that there remains significant interest from Big Pharma. Herein we review the enthusiasm for ADCs by focusing on the features of those approved by the FDA, and offer some thoughts as to where the field is headed.


Assuntos
Antineoplásicos/uso terapêutico , Imunoconjugados/uso terapêutico , Neoplasias/tratamento farmacológico , Animais , Aprovação de Drogas , Humanos , Estados Unidos , United States Food and Drug Administration
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...