Drug Safety For Marketed Drugs

In the wake of publicity and congressional attention to drug safety issues, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) requested the Institute of Medicine assess the drug safety system. The committee reported that a lack of clear regulatory authority, chronic underfunding, organizational problems, and a scarcity of post-approval data about drugs' risks and benefits have hampered the FDA's ability to evaluate and address the safety of prescription drugs after they have reached the market. Noting that resources and therefore efforts to monitor medications' riskâ€"benefit profiles taper off after approval, The Future of Drug Safety offers a broad set of recommendations to ensure that consideration of safety extends from before product approval through the entire time the product is marketed and used.

An estimated 48 percent of the population takes at least one prescription drug in a given month. Drugs provide great benefits to society by saving or improving lives. Many drugs are also associated with side effects or adverse events, some serious and some discovered only after the drug is on the market. The discovery of new adverse events in the postmarketing setting is part of the normal natural history of approved drugs, and timely identification and warning about drug risks are central to the mission of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Not all risks associated with a drug are known at the time of approval, because safety data are collected from studies that involve a relatively small number of human subjects during a relatively short period. Written in response to a request by the FDA, Ethical and Scientific Issues in Studying the Safety of Approved Drugs discusses ethical and informed consent issues in conducting studies in the postmarketing setting. It evaluates the strengths and weaknesses of various approaches to generate evidence about safety questions, and makes recommendations for appropriate followup studies and randomized clinical trials. The book provides guidance to the FDA on how it should factor in different kinds of evidence in its regulatory decisions. Ethical and Scientific Issues in Studying the Safety of Approved Drugs will be of interest to the pharmaceutical industry, patient advocates, researchers, and consumer groups.

This User’s Guide is intended to support the design, implementation, analysis, interpretation, and quality evaluation of registries created to increase understanding of patient outcomes. For the purposes of this guide, a patient registry is an organized system that uses observational study methods to collect uniform data (clinical and other) to evaluate specified outcomes for a population defined by a particular disease, condition, or exposure, and that serves one or more predetermined scientific, clinical, or policy purposes. A registry database is a file (or files) derived from the registry. Although registries can serve many purposes, this guide focuses on registries created for one or more of the following purposes: to describe the natural history of disease, to determine clinical effectiveness or cost-effectiveness of health care products and services, to measure or monitor safety and harm, and/or to measure quality of care. Registries are classified according to how their populations are defined. For example, product registries include patients who have been exposed to biopharmaceutical products or medical devices. Health services registries consist of patients who have had a common procedure, clinical encounter, or hospitalization. Disease or condition registries are defined by patients having the same diagnosis, such as cystic fibrosis or heart failure. The User’s Guide was created by researchers affiliated with AHRQ’s Effective Health Care Program, particularly those who participated in AHRQ’s DEcIDE (Developing Evidence to Inform Decisions About Effectiveness) program. Chapters were subject to multiple internal and external independent reviews.

In the past two decades public debate about the risks, benefits, and safety associated with drugs has intensified. Public disputes over risks are brought to court when individuals seek compensation for health problems attributed to a pharmaceutical product. The issue reaches legislatures and regulatory agencies when consumer advocates seek to influence the standards of drug usage. Front-page news tends to focus on accidents or other risk events with drugs. Drug risk and drug safety have become an important political issue. Drug regulat ory agencies have been instituted, and their responsibility has increased. The approval to market a drug is dependent on a set of sophisticated studies executed according to strict protocols and scientifically defined criteria. Drug surveillance activities have gained recognition, and reporting systems to identify drug safety problems have been strengthened. The understanding and management of drug safety is, nonetheless, beset by doubts, disagreements, and disputes. Conflict occurs over the significance of risk, the adequacy of evidence, the methodologies used to evaluate and measure risk, the standards that guide regulation, and the optimal means of communicating risk information to the public.

There have been long-standing concerns regarding the Food and Drug Admin.'s (FDA) oversight of postmarket drug safety. There were concerns such as limitations in the data FDA relies on to identify postmarket drug safety issues and the systems it uses to track such issues. Recommendations were made, including that FDA improve the independence of its program for resolving scientific disputes related to postmarket drug safety. This report examines the steps that FDA is taking to: (1) enhance its processes for making decisions about the safety of marketed drugs; (2) improve access to data that help the agency identify drug safety issues; and (3) build its capacity to fulfill its postmarket drug safety workload. Includes recomm. Illus.

The monitoring of drug safety is an issue that affects most health care professionals. This text aims to explain the processes involved in drug surveillance and considers drug safety from the perspectives of the pharmaceutical industry, the medical profession and regulatory authorities.

As the principal agency regulating food, drugs, medical devices, and biological products used by Americans, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) serves one of the most critical consumer protection functions of the federal government. The FDA's reach is enormous, regulating products that represent roughly 25 percent of all consumer spending in the United States. Since 1992, however, federal funding for the agency has diminished, and the FDA's Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) currently relies on the fees it receives from the industry it regulates to fund the majority of its drug regulation functions. Prescription drug safety is receiving heightened press coverage and congressional scrutiny as a result of recent, highly publicized events, such as the recall of Vioxx because of its link to heart attacks, and the link between certain antidepressants (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, or SSRIs) and an increased risk of suicidal ideation in children. To address these concerns, the FDA in 2005 commissioned the Institute of Medicine (IOM) to conduct an independent assessment of the current U.S. drug safety system. In September 2006, the IOM committee released its report-The Future of Drug Safety: Promoting and Protecting the Health of the Public-which included 25 recommendations for improving the system for drug safety review. The committee identified four major vulnerabilities in the U.S. drug safety system: (1) chronic underfunding; (2) organization problems, particularly inadequate integration of pre-and postmarket data review; (3) a range of technical problems related to the insufficient quantity and quality of postmarket data and inadequate capability to systematically monitor the risks and benefits of drugs after marketing; and (4) unclear regulatory authority and insufficiently flexible regulatory tools. Since the IOM report was issued, the FDA has taken a number of steps toward implementing the recommended improvements. Like many government agencies, however, the FDA is financially strained by its existing responsibilities, and fully implementing the recommended improvements to the drug safety system would require significant financial commitments.The IOM report addressed some of the costs associated with its recommendations, but left many unanswered questions about the resources required to fully achieve the envisioned improvements. To better understand the types and magnitude of resources required to achieve the goals of the IOM report, the IOM's Forum on Drug Discovery, Development, and Translation convened a 1-day symposium in March 2007. Challenges for the FDA: The Future of Drug Safety, Workshop Summary explains the presentations and discussions in seven key areas: addressing the FDA's resource challenges; strengthening the scientific base of the agency; integrating pre- and postmarket review; enhancing postmarket safety monitoring; conducting confirmatory drug safety and efficacy studies; enhancing the value of clinical trial registration; and enhancing the FDA's postmarket regulation and enforcement.

This book offers a wide-ranging description and analysis of recent developments and current trends in health policy with regard to cancer drug safety. The book opens with an overview of pharmacovigilance for cancer blockbuster drugs, covering both general considerations and efforts to develop a structured framework for the identification and reporting of adverse drug reactions (ADRs). A number of important examples of serious ADRs to hematology and oncology drugs are then reviewed, with evaluation of the lessons learned and the policy implications of the ensuing legal cases and their settlements. Further, the difficulty of reporting such blockbuster side effects in the medical literature is explored in an empirical study. Significant advances have been achieved in analytic methods for the identification of ADRs, and here there is a particular focus on the value of optimal discriminant analysis. Finally, the impacts on pharmacovigilance and drug safety of the huge fines paid under the U.S. False Claims Act relating to the defrauding of governmental programs also receive careful attention – these fines are playing an important role in changing the landscape for pharmaceutical safety.