Jill Wechsler is Pharmaceutical Technology's Washington editor, 7715 Rocton Ave., Chevy Chase, MD 20815, tel. 301.656.4634, jwechsler@advanstar.com
The US Food and Drug Administration
is under intense pressure to shore up public confidence in the safety
and quality of prescription drugs. Drug experts are scrutinizing the
risks associated with long-term use of statins, following the
withdrawal and labeling changes for COX-2 inhibitors. Reports of a rare
blindness among users of Pfizer's
impotence drug Viagra have raised alarms. Members of Congress and
health professionals are proposing strategies to accelerate FDA's
disclosure of serious adverse event information, to compel
manufacturers to make proposed label changes, and to complete promised
post-marketing studies.
FDA is responding with a range of programs and policies designed to
make drug safety information available to the public, including
proactive programs for identifying safety signals related to marketed
drugs. Pharmaceutical manufacturers are facing the increased need for
public disclosure of product quality concerns, added pressure to
complete Phase IV studies, changes in drug distribution practices, and
fines or product recalls for companies that fail to comply—more
intense monitoring for counterfeit or adulterated products is an added
plus.
Call for transparency Health and Human Services
(HHS) Secretary Mike Leavitt announced several FDA drug safety
initiatives this past February designed to demonstrate the agency's
ability to address drug safety concerns. Since then, FDA has been
issuing guidances and developing programs to implement these proposals.
The agency recently named the members of its new Drug Safety Oversight
Board, which was formed to assess particular safety issues related to
marketed drugs. The board also will provide an internal forum for
resolving disagreements among FDA staffers over the management of drug
safety issues. The board includes key officials from FDA and other HHS
agencies, but remains in the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER), as opposed to being more independent as some reformers proposed.
One early task for the safety board is to determine criteria for
posting drug safety information about FDA's new Drug Watch Web site.
This online information service was established to inform the medical
community about emerging drug safety problems, including those
involving off-label medication uses. Manufacturers are watching closely
to ensure that Drug Watch safety alerts are determined by accurate and
unbiased information. But, they are concerned that manufacturers will
have no opportunity to assess the validity of safety information before
FDA discloses it online.
FDA also has commissioned the Institute of Medicine (IOM) to conduct an
independent assessment of its current system for evaluating
post-marketing drug safety and to recommend ways to improve its
surveillance and assessment practices. The IOM panel held an
organizational meeting in June and will begin its serious work at a
second meeting on July 25, 2005 to complete its report before July
2006. The committee will examine how FDA fits into the nation's
broader system for ensuring drug safety, current FDA and industry
efforts to evaluate and manage safety problems, and whether FDA needs
additional legal authority or organizational changes to deal with
post-marketing safety issues more effectively.
HHS officials hope that these efforts will head off moves on Capitol
Hill to enact legislation establishing a new drug safety office that is
much more distinct from existing FDA drug approval activities. Sens.
Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) and Chris Dodd (D-Conn) introduced a bill in
April that seeks more autonomy for FDA staffers involved with
post-market safety assessment so that they will feel free to sound
warnings about medications raising safety concerns. The bill
establishes an FDA postmarket drug evaluation center separate from CDER
that would determine the need for label changes or possible market
withdrawal of drugs found to carry high risks. The legislation also
levies fines on companies that fail to complete postmarketing study
commitments and gives FDA the authority to require label changes on
marketed drugs.
Backers of this and other similar legislative proposals believe that
Congress should act now because FDA's new drug review board is not
sufficiently independent, and the IOM will take a year to complete its
evaluation. At the April meeting of FDA's science board, members urged
FDA to lay out the critical elements of an ideal post-market
surveillance system for drugs and for biologics and medical devices.
Such an analysis would permit this board of experts to recommend
changes to the IOM panel, to Congress, and to other safety advocates.
These issues also are being explored by FDA's Drug Safety and Risk
Management Advisory Committee, which offered recommendations for
strengthening the agency's adverse drug event reporting system at its
May meeting and plans to hold further sessions about FDA's methods for
detecting and assessing drug safety problems. (continued)