Cancer research and development and the drug development process

Annals of Oncology

Volumn 18, Issue SUPPL. 3, 2007, Pages

[No Author Info available]

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ALEMTUZUMAB; ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT; ARSENIC TRIOXIDE; BORTEZOMIB; IBRITUMOMAB TIUXETAN; IMATINIB; NEW DRUG; TEMOPORFIN;

ARTICLE; CANCER CELL; CANCER CHEMOTHERAPY; CANCER RESEARCH; CELL INTERACTION; CLINICAL TRIAL; DRUG APPROVAL; DRUG DESIGN; DRUG EFFICACY; DRUG INDUSTRY; DRUG MARKETING; DRUG TARGETING; EUROPE; FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION; FUNDING; GOVERNMENT; HUMAN; INVESTMENT; LEGAL ASPECT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SOCIAL WELFARE; THEORY; UNITED STATES;

EID: 54349086618     PISSN: 09237534     EISSN: 15698041     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdm100     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. European Cancer Research Managers Forum. European Cancer Research Funding Survey. 2005 http://www.ecrmforum.org/report/index.cfm.
2. Financial reports from National Cancer Institutes and Cancer charity organisation in Australia, Canada, Japan, New Zealand.
3. Moses H III et al. Financial anatomy of biomedical research. JAMA 2005; 294 (11): 1333-1342.
4. Centre for Medicines Research International Ltd. The 2005 CMR R&D Factbook. Chapter 2.
5. European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations. The Pharmaceutical Industry in Figures - Key Data - 2005 update. http://www.efpia.org/6_publ/infigures2005.pdf.
6. EFPIA - The European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations/Annual report 2002 (http://www.efpia.org/6_publ/annual/ Report2002.pdf).
7. DiMasi JA, Hansen RW, Grabowski HG. The price of innovation: New estimates of drug development costs. J Health Econ 2003; 22 (2): 151-185.
8. DiMasi JA et al. Cost of innovation in the pharmaceutical industry. J Health Econ 1991; 10 (2): 107-142.
9. Adams CP, Brantner VV. Estimating the cost of new drug development: Is it really 802 million dollars? Health Aff (Millwood) 2006; 25 (2): 420-428.
10. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. Oncology Tools. http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cder/ onctools/statistics.cfm.
11. Schmid E, Smith D. Keynote review: Is declining innovation in the pharmaceutical industry a myth? Drug Discov Today 2005; 10 (15): 1031-1039 http://www.fda.gov/cder/da/da.htm.
12. IMS Health. Top-Line Industry Data. 2004 http://www.imshealth.com/ims/ portal/front/indexC/0,2773,6025_5264_0,00.html.
13. European Medicines Agency (EMEA). http://www.emea.eu.int/.
14. Health Canada. Access to Therapeutic Products: The Regulatory Process in Canada. (11 August 2006, date last accessed).
15. Australian Government, Department of Health and Ageing, Therapeutic Goods Administration. Australian Regulatory Guidelines for prescription Medicines.
16. Medicines Control Council of South Africa. http://www.mccza.com/ (11 August 2006, date last accessed).
17. Anderson C, McAuslane N, Walker S. The impact of the changing regulatory environment on review times. CMR, International R&D briefing No.35 [on-line]. 2002; http://www.cmr.org/pdf/r_d35.pdf.
18. Netzer T. European Union centralised procedure for marketing authorisation of oncology drugs: An in-depth review of its efficiency. Eur J Cancer 2006; 42 (4): 446-455.
19. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), USA. http://www.fda.gov/.
20. Ono S et al. Review of new drug applications in Japan: The decline in approval times after the introduction of an internalized review system. Drug Inf J 2005.
21. Ono S et al. New drug approval times and clinical evidence in Japan. Contemp Clin Trials 2005; 26 (6): 660-672.
22. Health Canada, Priority Review of Drug Submissions - Guidance 2005.
23. Fujiwara Y, Kobayashi K. Oncology drug clinical development and approval in Japan: The role of the pharmaceuticals and medical devices evaluation center (PMDEC). Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 2002; 42 (2): 145-155.