Clinical Benefit and Expedited Approval of Cancer Drugs in the United States, European Union, Switzerland, Japan, Canada, and Australia

被引:22
|
作者
Hwang, Thomas J. [1 ,2 ,3 ,4 ]
Kesselheim, Aaron S. [3 ,4 ]
Tibau, Ariadna [5 ,6 ]
Lee, ChangWon C. [3 ,4 ]
Vokinger, Kerstin N. [3 ,4 ,7 ]
机构
[1] Brigham & Womens Hosp, Lank Ctr Genitourinary Canc, Dana Farber Canc Inst, Canc Innovat & Regulat Initiat, 45 Francis St, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[2] Brigham & Womens Hosp, Div Urol Surg, 45 Francis St, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[3] Brigham & Womens Hosp, Program Regulat Therapeut & Law Portal, Div Pharmacoepidemiol & Pharmacoecon, Dept Med, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[4] Harvard Med Sch, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[5] Hosp Santa Creu & Sant Pau, Dept Oncol, Inst Invest Biomed St Pau, Barcelona, Spain
[6] Univ Autonoma Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
[7] Univ Zurich, Inst Law, Zurich, Switzerland
基金
瑞士国家科学基金会;
关键词
ESMO-MAGNITUDE; THERAPEUTICS; COST; ASCO;
D O I
10.1200/OP.21.00909
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
PURPOSE: Regulatory agencies have sought to speed up the review of new cancer medicines and reduce delays in approval between countries. We examined trends in regulatory review times and association with clinical benefit for new cancer medicines in six jurisdictions: United States (Food and Drug Administration [FDA]), European Union (European Medicines Agency [EMA]), Switzerland (Swissmedic), Japan (Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency [PMDA]), Canada (Health Canada), and Australia (Therapeutic Goods Administration). METHODS: We studied all new cancer drugs approved in the six aforementioned jurisdictions from 2007 to 2020. We extracted all applicable expedited programs, total regulatory review times, and, for drugs first approved by the FDA, times to subsequent regulatory approval. Clinical benefit was assessed using the European Society for Medical Oncology-Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale value framework and ASCO-Cancer Research Committee's targets. Nonparametric Kruskal-Wallis test was used to compare total review times for high versus low clinical benefit drugs. RESULTS: One hundred and twenty eight drugs received initial approval in at least one of the six included jurisdictions. Most drugs approved by the FDA (91%) and Health Canada (59%) qualified for at least one expedited program within those jurisdictions, compared with 46% of EMA approvals and 18% of PMDA approvals. The FDA was the first regulator to approve 102 (80%) drugs. Delays in submission accounted for a median of 20.2% (EMA) to 83.8% (PMDA) of the time to subsequent approval. There was no association between high clinical benefit and shorter total review times. CONCLUSION: Most new cancer therapies were approved first by the FDA, and delays in submission of regulatory applications accounted for substantial delays in approving cancer drugs in other countries. Regulators should prioritize faster review for drugs with high clinical benefit.
引用
收藏
页码:676 / E1532
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Clinical benefit of breast cancer drugs approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration
    Carlos Tapia, J.
    Molto, Consolacion
    Bujosa, Aida
    Templeton, Arnoud J.
    Barnadas, Agusti
    Amir, Eithan
    Tibau, Ariadna
    CANCER RESEARCH, 2020, 80 (04)
  • [32] Efficiency issues in competition analysis in Australia, the European Union, and the United States
    Griffin, JP
    Sharp, LT
    ANTITRUST LAW JOURNAL, 1996, 64 (03) : 649 - 682
  • [33] Overview of the Regulation of Medical Devices and Drugs in the European Union and the United States
    Fiona Masterson
    Kathryn Cormican
    Therapeutic Innovation & Regulatory Science, 2013, 47 : 715 - 722
  • [34] Overview of the Regulation of Medical Devices and Drugs in the European Union and the United States
    Masterson, Fiona
    Cormican, Kathryn
    THERAPEUTIC INNOVATION & REGULATORY SCIENCE, 2013, 47 (06) : 715 - 722
  • [35] Postmarket Safety Communication for Protection of Public Health: A Comparison of Regulatory Policy in Australia, Canada, the European Union, and the United States
    Bhasale, Alice L.
    Sarpatwari, Ameet
    De Bruin, Marie L.
    Lexchin, Joel
    Lopert, Ruth
    Bahri, Priya
    Mintzes, Barbara J.
    CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY & THERAPEUTICS, 2021, 109 (06) : 1424 - 1442
  • [36] Clinical benefit of cancer drugs approved in Switzerland during the last decade
    Adam, R.
    Tibau, A.
    Molto Valiente, C.
    Seruga, B.
    Ocana, A.
    Amir, E.
    Templeton, A. J.
    ANNALS OF ONCOLOGY, 2020, 31 : S961 - S961
  • [37] Clinical benefit of cancer drugs approved in Switzerland 2010-2019
    Adam, Roman
    Tibau, Ariadna
    Molto Valiente, Consolacion
    Seruga, Bostjan
    Ocana, Alberto
    Amir, Eitan
    Templeton, Arnoud J.
    PLOS ONE, 2022, 17 (06):
  • [38] A decade of marketing approval of gene and cell based therapies in the United States, European Union, and Japan: A regulatory decision-making evaluation
    Coppens, Delphi G. M.
    de Wilde, Sofieke
    Guchelaar, Henk J.
    De Bruin, Marie L.
    Leufkens, Hubert G. M.
    Meij, Pauline
    Hoekman, Jarno
    PHARMACOEPIDEMIOLOGY AND DRUG SAFETY, 2018, 27 : 517 - 517
  • [39] Regulating lobbyists: A comparative analysis of the United States, Canada, Germany and the European Union
    Chari, Raj
    Murphy, Gary
    Hogan, John
    POLITICAL QUARTERLY, 2007, 78 (03): : 422 - 438
  • [40] Introduction to special section: Drug evaluation in the United States, Canada, and the European Union
    Yelin, EH
    Katz, PP
    ARTHRITIS & RHEUMATISM-ARTHRITIS CARE & RESEARCH, 2006, 55 (01): : 3 - 3