scholarly journals Advances on anticancer new drugs in China and the United States in 2020: from ongoing trial to drug approval

Author(s):  
Huang Hui-yao ◽  
Miao Hui-lei ◽  
Jun Wang ◽  
Wu Da-wei ◽  
Qi Lei ◽  
...  
Author(s):  
D Samba Reddy

Thirty-nine (39) new drugs have been approved by the U.S. FDA in 2012, a record highest number of approvals since 1996. The record is a sign that pharma companies are poised to tap recent advances from genomics and proteomics. This list includes novel new drugs, known as new molecular entities (NMEs), biologics and new products. Many life-saving drugs are approved for marketing. The list includes a total of 10 drugs for cancer treatment, and nearly a quarter of those approved in 2012 had orphan drug status.  Among the breakthrough drugs approved in 2012 were ivacaftor (cystic fibrosis), vasmodegib (skin cancer), HPC-C (human cord blood product), ruxolitinib (myelofibrosis) and a new combination drug to treat HIV. In addition,  several unique products were approved for the treatment of macular degeneration, chronic weight management, overactive bladder, actinic keratosis, erectile dysfunction, glaucoma, respiratory distress syndrome, and COPD. The approval of 39 drugs in 2012 underscores a robust success rate and confirms that innovation is once again beginning to pay off. In the existing climate of reduced revenues in the face of generic competitions, the future and survival of big companies rests heavily on their unique niche products. It is apparent that big Pharma and a growing number of emerging Biotechs alike have focused their attention on developing new NMEs for rare diseases. In 2012, the length of the FDA’s review is shorter than agencies in other countries. Innovative models adopted for R&D strategies, communications, and new regulatory changes appear to shorten development timelines. Despite record drug approvals, there is bleak scope for blockbusters because most of these drugs have a limited market. The pipeline for blockbusters appears very low. However, there is unmet medical need for new drugs in autism, Alzheimer’s disease and epilepsy. Overall, the new drug approval list unveils unique and reemerging trends indicating that the pharma companies are poised for big growth from new brands approved for marketing for narrow-spectrum indications.    


2003 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 525-542
Author(s):  
Merri C. Moken

The use of pharmaceutical products in the United States has increased more than the use of any other health resource from 1960 to 1990. In excess of 9,600 drugs were on the market in 1984, and the Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) approves approximately 30 new drugs and countless new applications for alterations of already existing drugs each year. In 2001, the $300 billion pharmaceutical industry sold $154 billion worth of prescription drugs in the United States alone, nearly doubling its $78.9 billion in sales in 1997. With such a rapid increase in market domination and expenditures, the U.S. government and many hospitals have focused their attention on the sales and pricing practices of pharmaceutical companies, as well as other potential factors contributing to these escalating prices. One such cause of the steadily increasing prices of brand name pharmaceuticals is the sale of fake or counterfeit pharmaceuticals (also called “look-alike” drugs).


2017 ◽  
Vol 2017 ◽  
pp. 1-13
Author(s):  
Keith V. Bletzer

Hardships that face transmigrants working in agriculture include the potential for drug use. Reliant on village-based networks that facilitate border crossing and developing a plan for a destination within this country, transmigrants who try new drugs/alcohol and/or continue on accustomed drugs/alcohol are facilitated in these endeavors through locally generated networks as alternative forms of access and support. Seven cases of undocumented men from Mexico are reviewed to show how use of illicit drugs is minimally affected by economic success and time in the United States, or village-based networks that first facilitated entry into this country. Prior conditions, especially childhood difficulties and search for socioeconomic autonomy, precipitate new and/or continuing drug use within the United States on this side of the border, where both forms of drug use are facilitated by locally generated networks.


2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e18501-e18501
Author(s):  
Ryan Huu-Tuan Nguyen ◽  
Yomaira Silva ◽  
Vijayakrishna K. Gadi

e18501 Background: Cancer clinical trials based in the United States (US) have lacked adequate representation of racial and ethnic minorities, the elderly, and women. Pivotal clinical trials leading to United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval are often multi-national trials and may also lack generalizability to underrepresented populations in the United States. We determined the racial, ethnic, age, and sex enrollment in pivotal trials relative to the US cancer population. Methods: We reviewed the FDA’s Drug Approvals and Databases for novel and new use drug approvals for breast, colorectal, lung, and prostate cancer indications from 2008 through 2020. Drugs@FDA was searched for drug approval summaries and FDA labels to identify clinical trials used to justify clinical efficacy that led to FDA approval. For eligible trials, enrollment data were obtained from FDA approval summaries, FDA labels, ClinicalTrials.gov, and corresponding journal manuscripts. Enrollment Fraction (EF) was calculated as enrollment in identified clinical trials divided by 2017 SEER cancer prevalence. All data sources were publicly available. Results: From 2008 through 2020, 60 drugs received novel or new use drug approval for breast, colorectal, lung, or prostate cancer indications based on 66 clinical trials with a total enrollment of 36,830. North America accounted for 9,259 (31%) enrollees of the 73% of trials reporting location of enrollment. Racial demographics were reported in 78% of manuscripts, 66% of ClinicalTrials.gov pages, and 98% of FDA labels or approval summaries. Compared with a 0.4% enrollment fraction among White patients, lower enrollment fractions were noted in Hispanic (0.2%, odds ratio [OR] vs White, 0.46; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.43 to 0.49, P< 0.001) and Black (0.1%, OR 0.29; 95% CI 0.28 to 0.31, P< 0.001) patients. Elderly patients (age ≥ 65 years) were less likely than younger patients to be enrollees (EF 0.3% vs 0.9%, OR 0.27; 95% CI 0.26 to 0.27, P< 0.001) despite accounting for 61.3% of cancer prevalence. For colorectal and lung cancer trials, females were less likely than males (EF 0.7% vs 1.1%, OR 0.66; 95% CI 0.63 to 0.68, P< 0.001) to be enrolled. Conclusions: Black, Hispanic, elderly, and female patients were less likely to enroll in cancer clinical trials leading to FDA approvals from 2008 to 2020. Race and geographic enrollment data were inconsistently reported in journal manuscripts and ClinicalTrials.gov. The lack of appropriate representation of specific patient populations in these key clinical trials limits their generalizability. Future efforts must be made to ensure equitable access, representation, and reporting of enrollees that adequately represent the US population of patients with cancer.


2003 ◽  
Vol 15 (S1) ◽  
pp. 277-281
Author(s):  
Peter Whitehouse

The development of new drugs to treat vascular dementia and other conditions in which cognitive impairment is due at least in part to vascular pathology will require future interaction among academic, industry, and government regulatory clinicians and scientists. This article offers the author's perspective on the positive involvement of the Food and Drug Administration in development of conceptual frameworks and practical approaches to treatment of conditions characterized by vascular burden of the brain.


2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. S237-S237
Author(s):  
Allison C Brown ◽  
Sarah Malik ◽  
Jennifer Huang ◽  
Amelia Bhatnagar ◽  
Rocio Balbuena ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Infections with metallo-β-lactamase (MBL)-producing organisms are emerging in the United States. Treatment options for these infections are limited. We describe MBL genes among carbapenemase positive carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CP-CRE) and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (CP-CRPA) isolates tested during the first two years of the Antibiotic Resistance Laboratory Network (AR Lab Network). Methods State and local public health laboratories tested CRE and CRPA isolates for organism identification, antimicrobial susceptibility, and PCR-based detection of blaKPC, blaNDM, blaOXA-48-like, blaVIM, and blaIMP carbapenemase genes. All testing results were sent to CDC at least monthly. Results Since January 2017, the AR Lab Network tested 21,733 CRE and 14,141 CRPA. CP-CRE were detected in 37% of CRE; 2% of CRPA were CP-CRPA. Among CP-CRE, 9% (686/8016) were MBL-producers (NDM, VIM, or IMP). Among MBL-producers, a blaNDM gene was detected most often (81%; 551/686). blaNDM were most common among Klebsiella spp. (47%; 261/551), blaIMP were most common among Providencia spp. (53%; 40/75), blaVIM was most common among Enterobacter spp. (19%; 25/62). Twelve percent (96) of MBL CP-CRE contained more than one carbapenemase gene. Among CP-CRPA, 73% (218/300) were MBL producers and blaVIM was the most common gene (62%; 186). Three (1%) MBL CP-CRPA contained more than one carbapenemase. Conclusion Increased testing of CRE and CRPA isolates through the AR Lab Network has facilitated early and rapid detection of hard-to-treat infections caused by MBL-producing organisms across the United States. The widespread distribution of MBL genes highlights the continued need for containment strategies that help prevent transmission between patients and among healthcare facilities. To support therapeutic decisions for severe infections caused by MBL-producing organisms, the AR Lab Network is now offering rapid susceptibility testing against aztreonam/avibactam, using digital dispenser technology. This testing program aims to close the gap between the availability of new drugs or drug combinations and the availability of commercial AST methods, thereby improving patient safety and antimicrobial stewardship. Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures.


1995 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 153-165 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nigel S. B. Rawson

In a recent article, Lexchin asks “who needs faster drug approval times in Canada?” and, on the basis of extremely limited and selective data, draws the conclusion that neither the public nor the pharmaceutical industry does. Whether the Canadian system is really slower is investigated by comparing Canadian and U.S. marketing approval dates and by using information on regulatory approval times from the two countries and elsewhere. Marketing approval dates in Canada are significantly later than those in the United States, although not consistently across all therapeutic categories; anti-cancer and gastrointestinal drugs have earlier approval dates in Canada. However, Canadian and U.S. regulatory approval times are not significantly different, indicating that marketing applications are submitted later in Canada, but both are considerably longer than those in the United Kingdom. The evidence shows that Canadians need faster drug approval times if individuals requiring the medications are not to suffer unnecessarily. A significant decrease in drug approval times and the establishment of comprehensive and effective postmarketing surveillance would reduce the time it takes for new drugs to be made available to Canadians while, at the same time, providing a high level of drug safety.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document