ABSTRACT
Diagnosing infectious diseases significantly influences patient care, aiding in outbreak identification, response, and public health monitoring. However, the range of FDA-approved molecular tests remains notably limited, especially concerning neglected tropical diseases (NTDs). Drawing upon our experience as one of the largest healthcare networks in the greater New York metropolitan area, this viewpoint manuscript aims to spotlight the existing diagnostic landscape and unmet clinical needs for 4 emerging NTDs increasingly prevalent in the United States, additionally, it delves into the possible adverse effects of the FDA's Proposed Rule on Laboratory-Developed Tests for these clinical conditions and the broader spectrum of NTDs.
Subject(s)
Communicable Diseases, Emerging , Neglected Diseases , United States Food and Drug Administration , United States/epidemiology , Neglected Diseases/epidemiology , Humans , United States Food and Drug Administration/legislation & jurisprudence , Communicable Diseases, Emerging/epidemiology , Tropical MedicineABSTRACT
PURPOSE: The generic drug industry currently faces multiple, serious issues that threaten the US drug supply. So-called "skinny labels" are one of the few tools authorized by Congress to expedite entry into the market by generic competitors when the first patent for a brand's drug compound (only) expires. This article reviews the law on this expedited marketing pathway for generic competitors, as well as limitations on its use. METHODS: We examined the literature on patent protection of brand drugs, including the timelines for production of generic competitors. We also examined the law concerning skinny labels, including a recent decision of the US Federal Circuit Court that clearly articulates the guidelines concerning entry into the generic market, including labeling, marketing, and promotion. FINDINGS: Skinny labels that follow the regulations set forth in the Hatch-Waxman Act, including the necessary carve-out procedure for "methods of use" still protected by 1 or more active patents, do not infringe a brand drug's label. Furthermore, the skinny label does not induce or contribute to infringement merely because its label contains US Food and Drug Administration-required safety profile data-even when the data cross-reference superiority studies on still-patent protected methods of use elsewhere in the label. IMPLICATIONS: Generic drugs have become essential to the broad, general availability of clinical therapeutic agents. The Hatch-Waxman Act was intended to facilitate entry of generic competitors into the marketplace, and the skinny label is an important tool to accomplish that end. As long as the generic manufacturer follows the essential skinny-label rules, specifically including marketing the compound without promoting or advertising those methods of use still protected by ongoing patents, the law will not find induced or contributory infringement.
Subject(s)
Drug Labeling , Drugs, Generic , Economic Competition , Patents as Topic , United States Food and Drug Administration , Humans , United States , Patents as Topic/legislation & jurisprudence , Drug Labeling/legislation & jurisprudence , United States Food and Drug Administration/legislation & jurisprudence , Drug Industry/legislation & jurisprudenceSubject(s)
Nicotine , Smoking Cessation , Tobacco Industry , Tobacco Products , Tobacco Use Disorder , Humans , Government Regulation , Nicotine/administration & dosage , Nicotine/analysis , Smoking Cessation/legislation & jurisprudence , Smoking Cessation/methods , Tobacco Industry/legislation & jurisprudence , Tobacco Products/analysis , Tobacco Products/legislation & jurisprudence , Tobacco Products/standards , Tobacco Use Disorder/prevention & control , United States , United States Food and Drug Administration/legislation & jurisprudenceABSTRACT
This Viewpoint discusses the death of a patient caused by unregulated biological products and efforts to encourage federal government oversight of such products.
Subject(s)
Bone Transplantation , Bone and Bones , Disease Outbreaks , Government Regulation , Tuberculosis , United States Food and Drug Administration , Humans , Cell- and Tissue-Based Therapy/adverse effects , Cell- and Tissue-Based Therapy/standards , Tissue Banks/legislation & jurisprudence , Tissue Banks/standards , United States/epidemiology , United States Food and Drug Administration/legislation & jurisprudence , United States Food and Drug Administration/standards , Bone Transplantation/adverse effects , Bone Transplantation/standards , Bone and Bones/microbiology , Bone and Bones/surgery , Tuberculosis/epidemiology , Tuberculosis/etiology , Tuberculosis/microbiology , Mycobacterium tuberculosis/isolation & purification , Female , Middle AgedABSTRACT
In this Policy Forum piece, Robin Feldman discusses how current legislation contributes to informational deficits around drug patents for biologic drugs in the United States.
Subject(s)
Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals , Intellectual Property , United States , Humans , Biological Products , Patents as Topic/legislation & jurisprudence , Legislation, Drug , United States Food and Drug Administration/legislation & jurisprudenceABSTRACT
Importance: The US Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) accelerated approval pathway allows approval of investigational drugs treating unmet medical needs based on changes to surrogate measures considered "reasonably likely" to predict clinical benefit. Postapproval clinical trials are then required to confirm whether these drugs offer clinical benefit. Objective: To determine whether cancer drugs granted accelerated approval ultimately demonstrate clinical benefit and to evaluate the basis of conversion to regular approval. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cohort study, publicly available FDA data were used to identify cancer drugs granted accelerated approval from 2013 to 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: Demonstrated improvement in quality of life or overall survival in accelerated approvals with more than 5 years of follow-up, as well as confirmatory trial end points and time to conversion for drug-indication pairs converted to regular approval. Results: A total of 129 cancer drug-indication pairs were granted accelerated approval from 2013 to 2023. Among 46 indications with more than 5 years of follow-up (approved 2013-2017), approximately two-thirds (29, 63%) were converted to regular approval, 10 (22%) were withdrawn, and 7 (15%) remained ongoing after a median of 6.3 years. Fewer than half (20/46, 43%) demonstrated a clinical benefit in confirmatory trials. Time to withdrawal decreased from 9.9 years to 3.6 years, and time to regular approval increased from 1.6 years to 3.6 years. Among 48 drug-indication pairs converted to regular approval, 19 (40%) were converted based on overall survival, 21 (44%) on progression-free survival, 5 (10%) on response rate plus duration of response, 2 (4%) on response rate, and 1 (2%) despite a negative confirmatory trial. Comparing accelerated and regular approval indications, 18 of 48 (38%) were unchanged, while 30 of 48 (63%) had different indications (eg, earlier line of therapy). Conclusions and Relevance: Most cancer drugs granted accelerated approval did not demonstrate benefit in overall survival or quality of life within 5 years of accelerated approval. Patients should be clearly informed about the cancer drugs that use the accelerated approval pathway and do not end up showing benefits in patient-centered clinical outcomes.
Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Agents , Drug Approval , Neoplasms , United States Food and Drug Administration , Humans , Antineoplastic Agents/therapeutic use , Clinical Trials as Topic , Cohort Studies , Drug Approval/legislation & jurisprudence , Drug Approval/methods , Drugs, Investigational/therapeutic use , Neoplasms/drug therapy , Neoplasms/mortality , Quality of Life , Survival Analysis , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome , United States , United States Food and Drug Administration/legislation & jurisprudence , Follow-Up StudiesSubject(s)
Commerce , Drug Industry , Economics, Pharmaceutical , Health Policy , Pharmaceutical Preparations , Humans , Commerce/economics , Commerce/legislation & jurisprudence , Drug Costs/legislation & jurisprudence , Drug Industry/legislation & jurisprudence , Drug Industry/economics , Economics, Pharmaceutical/legislation & jurisprudence , Patents as Topic/legislation & jurisprudence , Pharmaceutical Preparations/economics , United States , United States Food and Drug Administration/economics , United States Food and Drug Administration/legislation & jurisprudence , Health Policy/economics , Health Policy/legislation & jurisprudenceABSTRACT
In this Viewpoint, the Supreme Court case FDA v AHM is used to illustrate the tension the FDA faces between science and politics, and state authority over abortion vs federal authority over which drugs may be marketed nationwide.
Subject(s)
Abortifacient Agents , Abortion, Induced , Mifepristone , Politics , Supreme Court Decisions , United States Food and Drug Administration , Female , Humans , Pregnancy , Abortion, Induced/legislation & jurisprudence , Abortion, Induced/methods , Abortion, Legal/legislation & jurisprudence , Abortion, Legal/methods , United States , United States Food and Drug Administration/legislation & jurisprudence , Mifepristone/therapeutic use , Abortifacient Agents/therapeutic useABSTRACT
This Viewpoint outlines the potential effects of the Supreme Court case regarding mifepristone restrictions: a decision for the FDA would allow current dispensing, while ruling against the FDA would severely curtail access to reproductive health options.
Subject(s)
Abortifacient Agents , Abortion, Legal , Health Services Accessibility , Mifepristone , Reproductive Health Services , Supreme Court Decisions , Humans , Abortifacient Agents/therapeutic use , Abortion, Induced/legislation & jurisprudence , Abortion, Induced/methods , Abortion, Induced/trends , Abortion, Legal/legislation & jurisprudence , Abortion, Legal/methods , Abortion, Legal/trends , Health Services Accessibility/legislation & jurisprudence , Health Services Accessibility/trends , Mifepristone/therapeutic use , Nonprescription Drugs/therapeutic use , Reproductive Health Services/legislation & jurisprudence , Reproductive Health Services/trends , United States , United States Food and Drug Administration/legislation & jurisprudenceSubject(s)
Abortifacient Agents , Abortion, Induced , Mifepristone , Supreme Court Decisions , United States Food and Drug Administration , Female , Humans , Pregnancy , Abortion, Induced/legislation & jurisprudence , Abortion, Induced/methods , Mifepristone/supply & distribution , Mifepristone/therapeutic use , United States , Abortifacient Agents/supply & distribution , Abortifacient Agents/therapeutic use , United States Food and Drug Administration/legislation & jurisprudenceABSTRACT
This Viewpoint examines how US states are reforming legislation to allow access to psychedelics for therapeutic use, but federal laws consider these agents to be Schedule I drugs, and the discordance between state and federal law may create confusion and conflict.
Subject(s)
Hallucinogens , State Government , United States Food and Drug Administration , Hallucinogens/pharmacology , Hallucinogens/therapeutic use , United States , United States Food and Drug Administration/legislation & jurisprudenceABSTRACT
This Medical News article discusses the November 8 US Food and Drug Administration approval of the drug tirzepatide for chronic weight management in people with obesity or overweight with weight-related conditions.
Subject(s)
Anti-Obesity Agents , Obesity , Humans , Anti-Obesity Agents/therapeutic use , Disease Management , United States Food and Drug Administration/legislation & jurisprudence , Chronic Disease , Obesity/drug therapySubject(s)
Biomedical Technology , Device Approval , Health Services Accessibility , Insurance Coverage , Humans , Device Approval/legislation & jurisprudence , Health Services Accessibility/economics , Health Services Accessibility/legislation & jurisprudence , Insurance Coverage/economics , United States , United States Food and Drug Administration/legislation & jurisprudence , Biomedical Technology/economics , Biomedical Technology/legislation & jurisprudenceABSTRACT
This Viewpoint discusses why the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) should include e-cigarettes in its proposed cap of the nicotine concentration in combustible cigarettes to address the public health problem of vaping among adolescents.