Deadlines on FDA calls may compromise drug safety: study

Congress set strict deadlines for FDA to speed the arrival of new medications, but critics have long complained that the ticking clock spurred a dangerous rush to judgment.

The Harvard analysis of decades of drug approvals, published in Thursday’s New England Journal of Medicine, provides the first scientific evidence supporting some of those complaints.

The FDA challenged the findings with its own statistics. Still, the study sparked calls to re-examine the balance between speed and safety.

“The article is a wake-up call,” said Dr. Steven Nissen, the Cleveland Clinic’s influential cardiology chief who helped sound the alarm on the risks of some of those ultimately doomed drugs

“It puts the FDA in a very difficult situation when they’re trying to make complex decisions under these very, very tight deadlines,” he added. “We’ve got to reevaluate now whether that’s good public policy.”

Deadlines were first imposed on FDA by a 1992 law that allowed drug makers to pay millions of dollars in fees directly to the cash-strapped agency so it could hire more reviewers and clear a backlog of pending drug applications. In return, FDA had to make a decision — either approve or reject — on 90 percent of all drug candidates within 12 months of their application, or lose money. The deadline was 6 months for drugs so novel or potentially lifesaving to be classified high-priority.

Congress tightened the deadline for most drugs to 10 months in 1997.

Amid concern about risky drugs, Harvard professor Daniel Carpenter took a closer look at the impact. First, he found approval is 3.4 times as likely in the two months leading up to the user-fee deadline as at any other time.

Drugs approved in that just-before-deadline period had a four- to five-fold higher rate of later being withdrawn or requiring serious safety warnings, compared with drugs approved faster — presumably slam-dunks — or those that miss the deadline, Carpenter concluded.

The FDA argued the findings were not accurate, rushing out its own statistics that showed somewhat more withdrawals among drugs approved just before the deadline but not enough to be statistically significant.

“FDA won’t approve a drug if we are not ready,” said drug chief Dr. Janet Woodcock. “And we have the option of denying approval altogether if there is any question about safety.”

Subscribe to The China Post and save 25%. Click here

SharePrintEmail

Write a Comment

Terms

Enter your comments - 3000 characters max

Type in image code

Submit

 Receive China Post promos
 Respond to this email