Abstract
Background
Divisions within the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) often convene meetings of advisory committees, also known as AdComm or Panel meetings. The purpose of many AdComm meetings is for the FDA to obtain outside advice and recommendations on whether to approve a new drug or medical device. Laws and regulations indicate that such Panels are to provide recommendations regarding the approvability of the drug or device by FDA.
Methods
We examine recent AdComm meetings, including a systematic review of drugs and biologics AdComms between 2011 and 2016, to find whether FDA is obtaining Panel recommendations on drug and device approvability in accordance with these laws and regulations. (This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.)
Results
We find that Panel recommendations on approvability are often not obtained. We further find that, in most cases where Panel recommendations are obtained, voting procedures are such that those recommendations address product approvability in only an indirect manner.
Conclusions
While FDA rightly has the authority to exercise discretion in many aspects of the product approval process, we believe that it must obtain clear recommendations whenever it convenes a Panel to address product approvability.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Food and Drug Administration. About advisory committees: laws, regulations & guidance. https://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/AboutAdvisoryCommittees/LawsRegulationsGuidance/default.htm. Published July 3, 2017. Accessed August 29, 2017.
Food and Drug Administration. Guidance for FDA advisory committee members and FDA staff: voting procedures for advisory committee meetings. https://www.fda.gov/downloads/RegulatoryInformation/Guidances/UCM125641.pdf,p, p. 4. Published August 2008. Accessed April 17, 2017.
Food and Drug Administration. Panel recommendation options for premarket approval applications. https://www.fda.gov/OHRMS/DOCKETS/ac/05/briefing/2005-4162b1_02_Panel%20Recommendation%20Options.htm. Published December 10, 2004. Accessed April 17, 2017.
Food and Drug Administration. Summary of changes to CDRH’s advisory committee process. https://www.fda.gov/advisorycommittees/committeesmeetingmaterials/medicaldevices/ucm208485.htm. Updated July 8, 2014. Accessed April 17, 2017.
Smith J, Townsend S, Singh N, Ma P. FDA advisory committee meeting outcomes. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2012;11:513–514.
Food and Drug Administration. Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee (ODAC): Thursday, July 9, 2015, 7:59 a.m. to 12:05 p.m. https://www.fda.gov/downloads/AdvisoryCommittees/CommitteesMeetingMaterials/Drugs/OncologicDrugsAdvisoryCommittee/UCM459508.pdf,184-185. Accessed April 17, 2017.
Food and Drug Administration. Anti-infective drugs advisory committee, 63rd meeting, open session. https://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/98/transcpt/3383t1.pdf, 200, 220-221, 234-235, 251-252, 284-285. Transcript dated February 19, 1998. Accessed April 17, 2017.
Carpenter D. Reputation and Power: Organizational Image and Pharmaceutical Regulation at the FDA. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press; 2010.
Carpenter D, Chattopadhyay J, Moffitt S, Nall C. The complications of controlling agency time discretion: FDA review deadlines and postmarket drug safety. Am J Polit Sci. 2012;56:98–114.
Brynner R, Stephens T. Dark Remedy: The Impact of Thalidomide and Its Revival as a Vital Medicine. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Publishing; 2001:48–55.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Gulfo, J.V., Briggeman, J. & Gamie, A. Product Approvability Recommendations From FDA Advisory Committees: Inconsistently Sought, Indirectly Obtained. Ther Innov Regul Sci 52, 784–792 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1177/2168479018764654
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/2168479018764654