Dataset Information

Comparability Considerations and Challenges for Expedited Development Programs for Biological Products.

ABSTRACT: Expedited development programs for biological products to be used in the treatment of serious conditions bring about challenges because of the compressed clinical development timeframes. As expedited development does not lessen the quality expectations, one challenge is providing adequate chemistry, manufacturing, and control (CMC) information required to support approval of a biological product. In particular, the analytical comparability and, in some cases, pharmacokinetic comparability studies needed to bridge the clinical material to the commercial material could delay submission of applications for life-saving medicines. While there is the International Council for Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH) Topic Q5E guidance on assessing comparability of biological products before and after manufacturing changes, specific guidance on the emerging issue of conducting comparability exercises in the face of expedited drug development is lacking. In July 2019, clinical pharmacologists and product quality chemists from the US FDA and industry representatives convened an FDA workshop for a scientific exchange about considerations and challenges around conducting comparability exercises for expedited programs for biological products. This article highlights discussions from the workshop.

SUBMITTER: Schrieber SJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7691403 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparability Considerations and Challenges for Expedited Development Programs for Biological Products.

Schrieber Sarah J SJ Putnam Wendy S WS Chow Edwin Chiu Yuen ECY Cieslak Jacek J Zhuang Yanli Y Martin Steven W SW Hanson Paul P Maggio Frank F Rosado Leslie A Rivera LAR

Drugs in R&D 20201201 4

Expedited development programs for biological products to be used in the treatment of serious conditions bring about challenges because of the compressed clinical development timeframes. As expedited development does not lessen the quality expectations, one challenge is providing adequate chemistry, manufacturing, and control (CMC) information required to support approval of a biological product. In particular, the analytical comparability and, in some cases, pharmacokinetic comparability studie ...[more]

PMID: 32914381

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the use of special expedited development and review pathways at the US Food and Drug Administration over the past two decades.DesignCohort study.SettingFDA approved novel therapeutics between 1987 and 2014.PopulationPublicly available sources provided each drug's year of approval, their innovativeness (first in class versus not first in class), World Health Organization Anatomic Therapeutic Classification, and which (if any) of the FDA's four primary expedited development and review programs or designations were associated with each drug: orphan drug, fast track, accelerated approval, and priority review.Main outcome measuresLogistic regression models evaluated trends in the proportion of drugs associated with each of the four expedited development and review programs. To evaluate the number of programs associated with each approved drug over time, Poisson models were employed, with the number of programs as the dependent variable and a linear term for year of approval. The difference in trends was compared between drugs that were first in class and those that were not.ResultsThe FDA approved 774 drugs during the study period, with one third representing first in class agents. Priority review (43%) was the most prevalent of the four programs, with accelerated approval (9%) the least common. There was a significant increase of 2.6% per year in the number of expedited review and approval programs granted to each newly approved agent (incidence rate ratio 1.026, 95% confidence interval 1.017 to 1.035, P<0.001), and a 2.4% increase in the proportion of drugs associated with at least one such program (odds ratio 1.024, 95% confidence interval 1.006 to 1.043, P=0.009). Driving this trend was an increase in the proportion of approved, non-first in class drugs associated with at least one program for drugs (P=0.03 for interaction).ConclusionsIn the past two decades, drugs newly approved by the FDA have been associated with an increasing number of expedited development or review programs. Though expedited programs should be strictly limited to drugs providing noticeable clinical advances, this trend is being driven by drugs that are not first in class and thus potentially less innovative.

Dataset Information

Comparability Considerations and Challenges for Expedited Development Programs for Biological Products.

Publications

Comparability Considerations and Challenges for Expedited Development Programs for Biological Products.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets