Characteristics of efficacy evidence supporting approval of supplemental indications for prescription drugs in United States, 2005-14: Systematic review

BMJ (Online)

Volumn 351, Issue , 2015, Pages

  Wang, Bo ^a   Kesselheim, Aaron S ^a  

^a BRIGHAM AND WOMEN S HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AGENTS ACTING ON THE PERIPHERAL NERVOUS AND NEUROMUSCULAR SYSTEMS; ANTIBIOTIC AGENT; ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT; CARDIOVASCULAR AGENT; GASTROINTESTINAL AGENT; ORPHAN DRUG; PLACEBO; PRESCRIPTION DRUG; PSYCHOTROPIC AGENT;

CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); COHORT ANALYSIS; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); DRUG APPROVAL; DRUG EFFICACY; DRUG INDICATION; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION; HUMAN; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; TREATMENT OUTCOME; UNITED STATES; DRUG MANUFACTURE; NOMENCLATURE; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA; TRENDS;

CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; DRUG APPROVAL; HUMANS; ORPHAN DRUG PRODUCTION; PRESCRIPTION DRUGS; TERMINOLOGY AS TOPIC; TREATMENT OUTCOME; UNITED STATES; UNITED STATES FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION;

EID: 84947205197     PISSN: 09598146     EISSN: 17561833     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.h4679     Document Type: Review

References (31)

1. Goldberg NH, Schneeweiss S, Kowal MK, et al. Availability of comparative efficacy data at the time of drug approval in the United States. JAMA 2011;305:1786-9.
2. Downing NS, Aminawung JA, Shah ND, et al. Clinical trial evidence supporting FDA approval of novel therapeutic agents, 2005-2012. JAMA 2014;311:368-77.
3. Kesselheim AS, Myers JA, Avorn J. Characteristics of clinical trials to support approval of orphan vs nonorphan drugs for cancer. JAMA 2011;305:2320-6.
4. Hirsch BR, Califf RM, Cheng SK, et al. Characteristics of oncology clinical trials: insights from a systematic analysis of ClinicalTrials.gov. JAMA Intern Med 2013;173:972-9.
5. US Food and Drug Administration, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. NDA 21-335/S-001. 2002. www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda-docs/appletter/2002/21335s001ltr.pdf.
6. US Food and Drug Administration, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. NDA 021588/S-037. 2013. www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda-docs/appletter/2013/021588Orig1s037ltr.pdf.
7. US Food and Drug Administration. Drugs@FDA: FDA approved drug products. www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cder/drugsatfda/.
8. Munos B. 2014 New drug approvals hit 18-year high. 2015. www.forbes.com/sites/bernardmunos/2015/01/02/the-fda-approvals-of-2014/.
9. Berndt ER, Cockburn IM, Grépin KA. The impact of incremental innovation in biopharmaceuticals: drug utilization in original and supplemental indications. Pharmacoeconomics 2006;24(suppl 2):69-86.
10. DiMasi JA. Innovating by developing new uses of already-approved drugs: trends in the marketing approval of supplemental indications. Clin Ther 2013;35:808-18.
11. DiMasi JA, Brown JS, Lasagna L. An analysis of regulatory review times of supplemental indications for already-approved drugs: 1989-1994. Drug Inf J 1996;30:315-37.
12. DiMasi JA, Kaitin KI, Fernandez-Carol C, et al. New indications for already-approved drugs: an analysis of regulatory review times. J Clin Pharmacol 1991;31:205-15.
13. US Food and Drug Administration. Search orphan drug designations and approvals. www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/opdlisting/oopd/.
14. US Food and Drug Administration. Orphan Drug Act. http://www.fda.gov/regulatoryinformation/legislation/significantamendmentstothefdcact/orphandrugact/default.htm.
15. US Food and Drug Administration, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. sBLA 103000/5251. www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda-docs/appletter/2013/103000Orig1s5251ltr.pdf.
16. Stewart WF, Van Rooyen JB, Cundif GW, et al. Prevalence and burden of overactive bladder in the United States. World J Urol 2003;20:327-36.
17. Anderson J, Caplan L, Yazdany J, et al. Rheumatoid arthritis disease activity measures: American College of Rheumatology recommendations for use in clinical practice. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) 2012;64:640-7.
18. Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act. Pub L No. 107-109, 115 Stat 1408 (2002).
19. Li JS, Eisenstein EL, Grabowski HG, et al. Economic return of clinical trials performed under the pediatric exclusivity program. JAMA 2007;297:480-8.
20. Kearns GL, Abdel-Rahman SM, Alander SW, et al. Developmental pharmacology-drug disposition, action, and therapy in infants and children. N Engl J Med 2003;349:1157-67.
21. Ku LC, Smith PB. Dosing in neonates: special considerations in physiology and trial design. Pediatr Res 2015;77:2-9.
22. Vestal RE. Aging and pharmacology. Cancer 2000;80:1302-10.
23. US House of Representatives. 21st Century Cures Act. 2015 http://docs.house.gov/meetings/IF/IF00/20150519/103516/BILLS-1146ih.pdf.
24. US Food and Drug Administration. FDA's sentinel initiative. www.fda.gov/Safety/FDAsSentinelInitiative/ucm2007250.htm.
25. US Food and Drug Administration. The sentinel initiative: access to electronic healthcare data for more than 25 million lives. 2010. www.fda.gov/downloads/Safety/FDAsSentinelInitiative/UCM233360.pdf.
26. Moore TJ, Furberg CD. Electronic health data for postmarket surveillance: a vision not realized. Drug Saf 2015;38:601-10.
27. Reynolds IS, Rising JP, Coukell AJ, et al. Assessing the safety and effectiveness of devices after US Food and Drug Administration approval: FDA-mandated postapproval studies. JAMA Intern Med 2014;174:1773-9.
28. Fain K, Daubresse M, Alexander GC. The Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act and postmarketing commitments. JAMA 2013;310:202-4.
29. Kesselheim AS, Myers JA, Avorn J. Characteristics of clinical trials to support approval of orphan vs nonorphan drugs for cancer. JAMA 2011;305:2320-6.
30. Darrow JJ, Avorn J, Kesselheim AS. New FDA breakthrough-drug category-implications for patients. N Engl J Med 2014;370:1252-8.
31. GlaxoSmithKline. Promacta prescribing information. 2012. www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda-docs/label/2012/022291s008lbl.pdf.