NeuroRX

, Volume 1, Issue 3, pp 307–316 | Cite as

FDA: Evidentiary standards for drug development and approval

Summary

The United States Food and Drug Administration is charged with approving drug treatments that have been shown to be safe and effective. Relevant statutes and regulations provide a legal framework for establishing safety and effectiveness that is sufficiently flexible to ensure that appropriate scientific data are collected for specific treatments targeted to particular diseases. Nonetheless, all clinical trials proposed to establish effectiveness must incorporate common elements in order for the appropriate legal and scientific standards of drug approval to be met. This article will discuss the relevant laws and regulations pertaining to the current effectiveness standard and will discuss the most important clinical trial design elements currently considered acceptable for applications for treatments of neurologic and psychiatric illness.

Key Words

Substantial evidence of effectiveness statistical analyses adequate and well-controlled clinical investigations active control trials disease progression 

References

  1. 1.
    Guidance for industry—Providing evidence of effectiveness for human drug and biological products. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, May 1998.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Royall R. Statistical evidence: a likelihood paradigm. In: Monographs on statistics and applied probability (Cox DR, Isham V, Keiding N, Reid N, Tong H, eds), p 31. London: Chapman & Hall, 1997.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Leber P. Hazards of inference: the active control investigation.Epilepsia 30 [Suppl 1]: S57-S63, 1989.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Temple R, Ellenberg S. Placebo-controlled trials and active-control trials in the evaluation of new treatments. Part 1: ethical and scientific issues.Ann Intern Med 133: 455–463, 2000.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Temple R, Ellenberg S. Placebo-controlled trials and active-control trials in the evaluation of new treatments. Part 2: practical issues and specific cases.Ann Intern Med 133: 464–470, 2000.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    World Medical Association. World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki. Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects.Bull World Health Organ 79: 373–374, 2001.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Guidance for industry: E10 choice of control group and related issues in clinical trials. US Department of Health and Human Services, May 2001.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Guideline for industry: E4 dose-response information to support drug registration. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, November 1994.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Guideline for industry: E5 ethnic factors in the acceptability of foreign clinical data. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 1998.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Leber P. Slowing the progression of Alzheimer disease: methodologic issues.Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord 11 [Suppl 5]: S10-S21, 1997.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fleming TR, DeMets DL. Surrogate endpoints in clinical trials: are we being misled?Ann Intern Med 125: 605–613, 1996.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rosenberg A. Philosophy of science: a contemporary introduction (Moser PK, ed). Routledge contemporary introductions to philosophy. London: Routledge, 2000.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics, Inc 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of Neuropharmacological Drug ProductsU.S. Food and Drug Administration, Center for Drug Evaluation and ResearchRockville

Personalised recommendations