Skip to main content
Log in

How FDA Advisory Committee Members Prepare and What Influences Them

  • Regulatory Science
  • Published:
Therapeutic Innovation & Regulatory Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Since 1992 many changes have occurred in the regulations, guidelines, and processes governing the FDA, the biomedical industry, other stakeholders, and their interactions. Of particular importance, the FDA Amendments Act of 2007 made public advisory committee meetings mandatory for new molecular entities and devices requiring clinical trials, unless the necessity of convening such a meeting has been waived by the FDA commissioner. For effective preparation, product teams must now assume that such a public review will be necessary, even if not initially specified by the FDA’s review team. To understand what advisory committee members actually want from sponsors to enable their informed participation, the authors surveyed 101 current or former members of one of the FDA’s public biomedical advisory committees within the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, and the Center for Devices and Radiological Health. Their goal was to understand more fully their preparatory practices and preferences regarding materials provided by the sponsor and the FDA, advisory committee presentations, and Q&A sessions. The findings suggest that sponsors need to be clear, concise, and scientifically credible, and that some advisory committee members need to be more uniformly prepared.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Hutt PB. Investigations and reports on the Food and Drug Administration. In: Food and Drug Law. Washington, DC:Food and Drug Law Institute; 1991:48.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Sherman LA. Looking through a window of the Food and Drug Administration: FDA’s advisory committee System. Preclinica. 2004;2:99–102.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Rettig RA, Earley LE, Merrill RA, eds. Report of the Committee to Study the Use of Advisory Committees, the Institute of Medicine, U.S. National Academies of Science. Vol. 37. Washington, DC:National Academy Press; 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Golden MS, Witt A. Reinventing advisory committee management at the Food and Drug Administration. Drug Inf J. 1995;29:11–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Harris G. Expert kept from speaking at Antidepressant Advisory Committee. New York Times. April 16, 2004.

  6. Cocchetto DM, Hassall TH, Carter L, et al. Best practices for The advisory committee process for products regulated by CDER and CBER: a PhRMA white paper. Drug Inf J. 2008;42:13–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Richwine L. FDA official see drug approvals rising. Reuters. May 9, 2011.

  8. Ailsworth E. Patients driving direction of new drug research: the pharmaceutical industry and FDA respond to personalization demands. Boston Globe. June 20, 2012.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Todd D. McIntyre PhD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

McIntyre, T.D., Pappas, M. & DiBiasi, J.J. How FDA Advisory Committee Members Prepare and What Influences Them. Ther Innov Regul Sci 47, 32–40 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1177/0092861512458096

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0092861512458096

Keywords

Navigation