The new drug approvals of 1996, 1997, and 1998: Drug development trends in the user fee era

Drug Information Journal

Volumn 34, Issue 1, 2000, Pages 1-14

  Kaitin, Kenneth I ^a   Healy, Elaine M ^a  

^a TUFTS UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Drug development; FDA Modernization Act of 1997; Food and Drug Administration; New chemical entity; Pharmaceutical industry; Pharmaceutical innovation; Prescription Drug User Fee Act of 1992

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; DRUG APPROVAL; DRUG INDUSTRY; DRUG MANUFACTURE; DRUG MARKETING; FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION; LAW; PRIORITY JOURNAL; UNITED STATES;

EID: 0034045314     PISSN: 00928615     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/009286150003400101     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Kaitin KI, Manocchia MA. The new drug approvals of 1993, 1994, and 1995: trends in drug development. Am J Therapeutics. 1997 Jan;4(1):46-54.
2. Kaitin KI, Manocchia M, Seibring M, Lasagna L. The new drug approvals of 1990, 1991, and 1992: trends in drug development. J Clin Pharmacol. 1994 Feb;34(2):120-127.
3. Kaitin KI, DiCerbo PA, Lasagna L. The new drug approvals of 1987, 1988, and 1989: Trends in drug development. J Clin Pharmacol. 1991 Feb; 31(2): 116-122.
4. Kaitin KI, Richard BW, Lasagna L. Trends in drug development: the 1985-86 new drug approvals. J Clin Pharmacol. 1987 Aug;27(8):542-548.
5. Prescription Drug User Fee Act of 1992. Public Law 102-571 (1992)ct 29;21 USC 379;106 Stat 4491.
6. Kaitin KI. The Prescription Drug User Fee Act of 1992 and the new drug development process. Am J Therapeutics. 1997 May;4(5/6):167-172.
7. Kaitin KI. Statement. Hearing before the Subcommittee on Health and Environment of the Committee on Commerce, House of Representatives. The Need for FDA Reform, February 27, 1996. 104th Congress 2d Session:81-7,100-101.
8. Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act of 1997. Public Law 105-115 (1997 Nov 21); 21 U.S.C. 355a; 111 Stat 2296.
9. Pharma 2005: an industrial revolution in R&D. London: Price WaterhouseCoopers; 1998.
10. Final annual performance report: Prescription Drug User Fee Act of 1992: fiscal year 1997 report to Congress. Rockville, MD: Food and Drug Administration; Dec 1997.
11. FY 1998 performance report to Congress for the Prescription Drug User Fee Act of 1992 as amended by the Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act of 1997. www.fda.gov/ope/pdufa/report98/default. htm#Outcomes.
12. DiMasi JA. Improving the new drug development process. Testimony. Hearing before the Subcommittee on Health and Environment of the Committee on Commerce, House of Representatives. Reauthorization of the Prescription Drug User Fee Act and FDA reform, April 23, 1997. 105th Congress 1st Session: 46-52, 62-68. www.house.gov/commerce/health/ hearings/042397/witness.htm.
13. Kessler DA, Hass AE, Feiden KL, Lumpkin M, Temple R. Approval of new drugs in the United States. Comparison with the United Kingdom, Germany, and Japan. JAMA. 1996 Dec 11;276(22):1826-1831.
14. Lurie P. Falling FDA standards: the Health Research Group study. Med Crossfire. 1999 Apr;1(3):53-55.
15. Faster approval of new drugs does not compromise US public safety. Tufts Center for the Study of Drug Development Impact Report. June 1999.
16. Managing the risks from medical product use: creating a risk management framework. Report to the FDA Commissioner from the Task Force on Risk Management. Rockville, MD: Food and Drug Administration; May 1999.
17. Drews J. The impact of cost containment on pharmaceutical research and development: 10th CMR annual lecture, June 1995. Carshalton, Surrey, UK: Centre for Medicines Research; 1995.