McIntyre Todd D, Pappas Mimi, DiBiasi James J
1 3D Communications, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2013 Jan;47(1):32-40. doi: 10.1177/0092861512458096.
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.
自1992年以来,美国食品药品监督管理局(FDA)、生物医学行业、其他利益相关者及其相互作用的相关法规、指南和流程发生了许多变化。特别重要的是,2007年的《FDA修正法案》规定,对于需要进行临床试验的新分子实体和器械,公开咨询委员会会议是强制性的,除非FDA专员放弃召开此类会议的必要性。为了有效准备,产品团队现在必须假设需要进行这样的公开审查,即使FDA审查团队最初没有明确规定。为了了解咨询委员会成员实际希望申办方提供什么以使其能够进行明智的参与,作者对生物制品评估和研究中心、药品评估和研究中心以及器械和放射健康中心内FDA的一个公共生物医学咨询委员会的101名现任或前任成员进行了调查。他们的目标是更全面地了解他们在申办方和FDA提供的材料、咨询委员会报告以及问答环节方面的准备做法和偏好。研究结果表明,申办方需要清晰、简洁且具有科学可信度,并且一些咨询委员会成员需要更统一地做好准备。