Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Opinion
  • Published:

Balancing early market access to new drugs with the need for benefit/risk data: a mounting dilemma

Abstract

Drug regulatory agencies are increasingly pressed by the challenge of finding the appropriate balance between the need for rapid access to new drugs and the need to ensure comprehensive data on their benefits and risks. This dilemma is not new, but has been made more prominent by recent high-profile drug withdrawals and conflicting demands, including the need to improve the efficiency of drug development on one hand, and the need to avoid exposing patients to unnecessary risks or possibly ineffective treatments on the other. Here, we summarize the current demands by stakeholders and the scientific and regulatory issues at stake, describe existing and emerging regulatory approaches, and speculate on future directions, such as evolution of the current regulatory model from a one-off marketing authorization to a life-cycle approach.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

from$1.95

to$39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: The regulator's dilemma.
Figure 2: The challenges of identifying rare adverse drug reactions in clinical trials.
Figure 3: Staggered approval — the regulatory life cycle.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ross, D. B. The FDA and the case of Ketek. N. Engl. J. Med. 356, 1601–1604 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Garattini, S. & Bertele, V. How can we regulate medicines better? BMJ 335, 803–805 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Nissen, S. E. & Wolski, K. Effect of rosiglitazone on the risk of myocardial infarction and death from cardiovascular causes. N. Engl. J. Med. 356, 2457–2471 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Carpenter, D., Zucker, E. J. & Avorn, J. Drug-review deadlines and safety problems. N. Engl. J. Med. 358, 1354–1361 (2008).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Barbui, C. & Garattini S. Regulatory policies on medicines for psychiatric disorders: is Europe on target? Br. J. Psychiatry 190, 91–93 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Van Luijn, J. C., Gribnau, F. W. & Leufkens, H. G. Availability of comparative trials for the assessment of new medicines in the European Union at the moment of market authorization. Br. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 63, 159–162 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Kaplan, W. & Laing, R. Priority Medicines for Europe and the World 1–154 (WHO, Geneva, 2004).

    Google Scholar 

  8. Pignatti, F. et al. The review of drug applications submitted to the European Medicines Evaluation Agency: frequently raised objections, and outcome. Eur. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 58, 573–80 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Garattini, S. & Bertele, V. New approach to clinical trials and drug registration. Author's suggestions for drug approval are questionable. BMJ 323, 341 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. EMEA. The European Medicines Agency Road Map to 2010: Preparing the Ground for the Future 1–68 (EMEA, London, 2005).

  11. Kinsley, M. Why Science Can't Save the GOP. Time (New York), 24 (10 Dec 2007).

    Google Scholar 

  12. Cooksey, D. A Review of UK Health Research Funding. 1–127 (Her Majesty's Stationery Office, London, 2006).

    Google Scholar 

  13. Kola, I. & Landis, J. Can the pharmaceutical industry reduce attrition rates? Nature Rev. Drug Discov. 3, 711–715 (2004).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Avorn, J. Paying for drug approvals — who's using whom? N. Engl. J. Med. 356, 1697–1700 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. FDA. Report on the Performance of Drug and Biologics Firms in Conducting Postmarketing Commitment Studies. Docket No. 2003N-0170. FDA web site [online] (2004).

  16. Finkelstein, J. B. Accelerated approval regulations may need overhaul, panel suggests. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 97, 1802–1804 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. FDA. Innovation or Stagnation? Challenge and Opportunity on the Critical Path to New Medical Products. FDA web site [online] (2004).

  18. FDA. FDA's Critical Path Initiative — Science Enhancing the Health and Well-Being of All Americans. FDA web site [online] (2007).

  19. IMI. The Innovative Medicines Initiative. IMI web site [online] (2007).

  20. [No authors listed]. Preliminary report: effect of encainide and flacainide on mortality in a randomized trial of arrhythmia suppression after myocardial infarction. The Cardiac Arrhythmia Suppression Trial (CAST) Investigators. N. Engl. J. Med. 321, 406–412 (1989).

  21. Hughes, B. An audience with Clifford Rosen. Nature Rev. Drug Discov. 7, 382 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Barter, P. J. et al. Effects of torcetrapib in patients at high risk for coronary events. N. Engl. J. Med. 357, 2109–2122 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Cleland, J. G. & Atkin, S. L. Thiazolidinediones, deadly sins, surrogates, and elephants. Lancet 370, 1103–1104 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Opar, A. Novel diabetes drugs to face higher hurdles? Nature Rev. Drug Discov. 6, 687–688 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Dagher, R., Johnson, J., Williams, G., Keegan, P. & Pazdur, R. Accelerated approval of oncology products: a decade of experience. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 96, 1500–1509 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. EMEA. Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use Summary of Positive Opinion for Tyverb. EMEA web site [online] (2008).

  27. Kramer, J. A., Sagartz, J. E. & Morris, D. L. The application of discovery technology and pathology towards the design of safer pharmaceutical lead candidates. Nature Rev. Drug Discov. 6, 636–649 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. The Medicines in Europe Forum, HAI Europe & The ISDB. Open letter to EC President Barroso 10 October 2007. European Commission web site [online] (2007).

  29. Joshi, G. P., Gertler, R. & Fricker, R. Cardiovascular thromboembolic adverse effects associated with cyclooxygenase-2 selective inhibitors and nonselective antiinflammatory drugs. Anesth. Analg. 105, 1793–1804 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Park, B. K., Pirmohamed, M. & Kitteringham, N. R. Role of drug disposition in drug hypersensitivity: a chemical, molecular, and clinical perspective. Chem. Res. Toxicol. 11, 969–988 (1998).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Schultz, W. B. Bolstering the FDA's drug-safety authority. N. Engl. J. Med. 357, 2217–2219 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Rawlins, M. D. Cutting the cost of drug development? Nature Rev. Drug Discov. 3, 360–364 (2004).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Delany, M. Accelerated approval: where are we now? Res. Initiative Treat. Action Summer, 18–22 (2002).

  34. Garattini, S. & Bertele, V. Non-inferiority trials are unethical because they disregard patients' interests. Lancet 370, 1875–1877 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. EMEA. Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP). Guideline on the Scientific Application and the Practical Arrangements Necessary to Implement Commission Regulation (EC) No 507/2006 on the Conditional Marketing Authorisation for Medicinal Products for Human Use Falling Within the Scope of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004. EMEA web site [online] (2006).

  36. FDA. Fast Track, Accelerated Approval and Priority Review. Acclerating Availability of New Drugs for Patients with Serious Diseases. FDA web site [online] (2006).

  37. Committee on the Assessment of the US Drug Safety System & Board on Population Health and Public Health Practice. The Future of Drug Safety. Promoting and Protecting the Health of the Public 1–348 (eds Baciu, A., Stratton, K. & Burke, S. P.) (The National Academies Press, Washington, DC, 2007).

  38. EMEA & HMA. European Risk Management Strategy: 2008–2009 Work Programme Adopted. EMEA web site [online] (2007).

  39. EMEA. Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP). Guideline on Risk Management Systems for Medicinal Products for Human Use. EMEA web site [online] (2005).

  40. Sheiner, L. B. Learning versus confirming in clinical drug development. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 61, 275–291 (1997).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. McClellan, M. Drug safety reform at the FDA — pendulum swing of systematic improvement? N. Engl. J. Med. 356, 1700–1702 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Avorn, J. In defense of pharmacoepidemiology — embracing the yin and yang of drug research. N. Engl. J. Med. 357, 2219–2221 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. EMEA. Executive Summary Report on EMEA Meeting with Interested Parties and Research Centres on ENCEPP (European Network of Centres for Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacovigilance). 28 June 2007, EMEA. EMEA web site [online] (2007).

  44. Van Merkerk, R. O. & Boon, W. P. C. Industry strategies on theranostics: need for structural alignment. Drug Discov. World 8, 61–70 (2007).

    Google Scholar 

  45. Wang, S. J., O'Neill, R. T. & Hung, H. M. Approaches to evaluation of treatment effect in randomized clinical trials with genomic subset. Pharm. Stat. 6, 227–244 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Vandenbroecke, J. P. Observational research, randomised trials, and two views of medical science. PLoS Med. 5, e67 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Kirsch, I. et al. Initial severity and antidepressant benefits: a meta-analysis of data submitted to the Food and Drug Administration. PLoS Med. 5, e45 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Editorial. UK's NICE to offer scientific advice to pharma companies. Regul. Aff. J. 19, 412–413 (2008).

  49. European network for Health Technology Assessment (EUnetHTA). HTA Core Model for Medical and Surgical Interventions. First Public Draft (Revised) 11th July 2007. EUnetHTA web site [online] (2007).

  50. [No author listed]. Commission's guidance on protecting new indications. Scrip 3319, 2 (2007).

  51. EMEA. European Public Assessment Report (EPAR) Sutent. EPAR Summary for the Public. EMEA web site [online] (2007).

  52. The British Heart Foundation (BHF). Incidence of Myocardial Infarction. BHF Statistics web site [online] (2007).

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hans-Georg Eichler.

Related links

Related links

FURTHER INFORMATION

Public citizen

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Eichler, HG., Pignatti, F., Flamion, B. et al. Balancing early market access to new drugs with the need for benefit/risk data: a mounting dilemma. Nat Rev Drug Discov 7, 818–826 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1038/nrd2664

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrd2664

This article is cited by

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing