Critics of comparative clinical effectiveness argue that the research, which relies in part on large-scale clinical trials, directly conflicts with personalized medicine's focus on patient sub-populations. Can the two peacefully co-exist?
Comparative clinical effectiveness certainly has the potential to dramatically change the drug development process. But some observers question whether it conflicts with another movement that promises to revolutionize the US health care system: personalized medicine.
The Food & Drug Administration has seized on personalized medicine as one way to restart a lagging R&D effort. Smart...
Many platform designation requests have been from sponsors eager to cite other sponsors’ products, but CBER Director Peter Marks said in an interview with the Pink Sheet his office likely is years away from accepting those applications.
CBER Director Peter Marks outlines a streamlined process to approval for treating different mutations of the same gene. NCATS’ Philip Brooks tells the Pink Sheet the approach avoids the need to “start from scratch for every new mutation.”
New draft guidance defines the necessary components of a platform technology designation request, including that sponsors demonstrate how it will save the FDA review time.
CBER’s Nicole Verdun said the FDA is using the principles of the platform approach in situations that don’t qualify for the agency’s new incentive.
Long-term follow-up requirements have taken a conservative approach but could be ripe for re-examination and global harmonization given the years of experience with the products, Kite Pharma executive director says; former FDA gene/cell therapy office head Wilson Bryan calls for elimination of the classwide REMS.
Program for collaborative reviews of gene therapy applications is getting under way with the European Medicines Agency. After launch, the pilot could be expanded to earlier discussions around CMC and pharm/tox data requirements, FDA’s Nicole Verdun said.
