Innovating by developing new uses of already-approved drugs: Trends in the marketing approval of supplemental indications

Clinical Therapeutics

Volumn 35, Issue 6, 2013, Pages 808-818

  DiMasi, Joseph A ^a  

^a TUFTS UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Biopharmaceutical industry; FDA; Innovation; Pediatric use; Supplemental indication; Therapeutic significance rating

Indexed keywords

ANALGESIC AGENT; ANESTHETIC AGENT; ANTIINFECTIVE AGENT; ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT; CARDIOVASCULAR AGENT; CENTRAL NERVOUS SYSTEM AGENTS; GASTROINTESTINAL AGENT; HORMONE; IMMUNOLOGIC AGENT; RESPIRATORY TRACT AGENT; BIOLOGICAL FACTOR;

ARTICLE; DRUG APPROVAL; DRUG EFFICACY; DRUG INDICATION; DRUG LEGISLATION; DRUG MARKETING; FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION; UNITED STATES; DRUG DATABASE; DRUG REPOSITIONING; ECONOMICS; HUMAN; MARKETING; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA; TIME; TRENDS;

BIOLOGICAL FACTORS; DATABASES, PHARMACEUTICAL; DRUG APPROVAL; DRUG REPOSITIONING; HUMANS; MARKETING; TIME FACTORS; UNITED STATES; UNITED STATES FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION;

EID: 84879459828     PISSN: 01492918     EISSN: 1879114X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2013.04.004     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Berndt E.R., Cockburn I.M., Grepin K.A. The impact of incremental innovation in biopharmaceuticals: drug utilization in original and supplemental indications. Pharmacoeconomics 2006, 24(Suppl 2):69-86.
2. DiMasi J.A., Hansen R.W., Grabowski H.G., Lasagna L. Cost of innovation in the pharmaceutical industry. J Health Econ 1991, 10:107-142.
3. DiMasi J.A., Hansen R.W., Grabowski H.G. The price of innovation: new estimates of drug development costs. J Health Econ 2003, 22:151-185.
4. DiMasi J.A., Grabowski H.G. The cost of biopharmaceutical R&D: is biotech different?. Manag Dec Econ 2007, 28:285-291.
5. DiMasi J.A., Feldman L., Seckler A., Wilson A. Trends in risks associated with new drug development: success rates for investigational drugs. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2010, 87:272-277.
6. DiMasi J.A., Lasagna L. Development of supplemental indications for already-approved drugs by the United States pharmaceutical industry. J Clin Res Pharmacoepidemiol 1991, 5:19-33.
7. DiMasi J.A., Faden L. Factors associated with multiple FDA review cycles and approval phase times. Drug Inf J 2009, 43:201-225.
8. Kaitin K.I., DiMasi J.A. Pharmaceutical innovation in the 21st century: new drug approvals in the first decade, 2000-2009. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2011, 89:183-188.
9. Spivey R.N., Lasagna L., Trimble A.G. New indications for already-approved drugs: time trends for the new drug application review phase. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1987, 41:368-370.
10. DiMasi J.A., Kaitin K.I., Fernandez-Carol C., Lasagna L. New indications for already-approved drugs: an analysis of regulatory review times. J Clin Pharmacol 1991, 31:205-215.
11. DiMasi J.A., Brown J.S., Lasagna L. An analysis of regulatory review times of supplemental indications for already-approved drugs: 1989 to 1994. Drug Inf J 1996, 30:315-337.
12. Kaitin K.I., DiMasi J.A. Measuring the pace of new drug development in the user fee era. Drug Inf J 2000, 34:673-680.
13. Milne C.-P. Exploring the frontiers of law and science: the FDAMA's pediatric studies initiative. Food Drug Law J 2002, 57:491-517.
14. FierceMarkets. FDA approvals of 2012. Accessed January 8, 2013. http://www.fiercebiotech.com/slideshows/fda-approvals-2012.
15. Lichtenberg F.R. Are the benefits of newer drugs worth their cost? evidence from the 1996 MEPS. Health Aff 2001, 20:241-251.
16. Lichtenberg F.R. The impact of new drugs on US longevity and medical expenditure, 1990-2003: evidence from longitudinal, disease-level data. Am Econ Rev 2007, 97:438-443.