Search

A common view within the pharmaceutical industry is that there is a problem with drug discovery and we should do something about it. There is much sympathy for this from academics, regulators and politicians. In this article I propose that lessons learnt from evolution help identify those factors that favour successful drug discovery. This personal view is influenced by a decade spent reviewing drug development programmes submitted for European regulatory approval. During the prolonged gestation of a new medicine few candidate molecules survive. This process of elimination of many variants and the survival of so few has much in common with evolution, an analogy that encourages discussion of the forces that favour, and those that hinder, successful drug discovery. Imagining a world without vaccines, anaesthetics, contraception and anti-infectives reveals how medicines revolutionized humanity. How to manipulate conditions that favour such discoveries is worth consideration., (© 2011 The Author. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology © 2011 The British Pharmacological Society.)

Introduction: The Indian biopharmaceutical sector comprises nearly 40 companies that manufacture and/or market 14 recombinant drugs that account for nearly 50 products. Among these, 22 companies have manufacturing facilities in India., Objective: The aim of the present study was to analyze the patenting trends, commercialization, and regulatory system for biopharmaceuticals in India., Methods: Representatives from 19 such biopharmaceutical companies were interviewed on aspects related to regulatory compliance, manufacturing, commercialization, and innovation in order to understand the challenges faced by them in the current regulatory and patent system., Results: The study revealed that 94% of the companies have filed patents and 52% are developing new biologic entities in areas such as diabetes mellitus, cancer, and congestive heart diseases. Forty-two percent of the companies consider delays in regulatory approval to be a major constraint for biopharmaceutical industry development. Almost all are of the opinion that uniform guidelines across countries would help to prevent delays in the commercialization of products., Conclusion: A high proportion of representatives of the biopharmaceutical industry in India identified that elaboration of regulatory guidelines, defined submission requirements, and drug approval timelines are vital to the growth of the biopharmaceutical industry., (© 2011 Adis Data Information BV. All rights reserved.)

The development of drug and biological products intended to treat rare diseases (Orphan diseases) is one of the fastest growing areas of clinical research, and also one of the most challenging. This article provides an introduction to two important regulatory considerations for Orphan drugs: Orphan status designations and general considerations for the administration of investigational agents in early phase clinical trials. Incentives available to orphan drug developers under the Orphan Drug Act (ODA) and requirements for obtaining an orphan status designation are discussed. An introductory overview of ethical and statutory considerations for investigational drugs, requirements for initiating investigational new drug applications (INDs), and sources of information and advice from the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) are also described.

Rotavirus gastroenteritis (RVGE) is the leading cause of severe diarrhea in children worldwide. This paper provides an overview of the development, clinical evaluation, and postlicensure impact of RotaTeq™(Rotavirus Vaccine, Live, Oral, Pentavalent, Merck & Co., Inc.). RotaTeq, an oral vaccine, is uniquely designed to contain five human-bovine reassortant rotavirus strains expressing the human serotypes G1, G2, G3, G4, and P1A[8], which represent the most common human rotavirus serotypes responsible for ∼85% of RVGE worldwide. The development required novel solutions for manufacturing, testing, and formulation for each of the reassortants. In one of the largest vaccine clinical trials conducted, the vaccine was shown to be well tolerated and highly efficacious against severe RVGE. Efficacy has also been demonstrated in lower-income countries. In large U.S. postlicensure studies, there have been no safety signals identified, and RotaTeq has had a significant impact on reducing RVGE and its associated medical costs since licensure in 2006., (© 2011 New York Academy of Sciences.)

Background: Historically, public-sector researchers have performed the upstream, basic research that elucidated the underlying mechanisms of disease and identified promising points of intervention, whereas corporate researchers have performed the downstream, applied research resulting in the discovery of drugs for the treatment of diseases and have carried out development activities to bring them to market. However, the boundaries between the roles of the public and private sectors have shifted substantially since the dawn of the biotechnology era, and the public sector now has a much more direct role in the applied-research phase of drug discovery., Methods: We identified new drugs and vaccines approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that were discovered by public-sector research institutions (PSRIs) and classified them according to their therapeutic category and potential therapeutic effect., Results: We found that during the past 40 years, 153 new FDA-approved drugs, vaccines, or new indications for existing drugs were discovered through research carried out in PSRIs. These drugs included 93 small-molecule drugs, 36 biologic agents, 15 vaccines, 8 in vivo diagnostic materials, and 1 over-the-counter drug. More than half of these drugs have been used in the treatment or prevention of cancer or infectious diseases. PSRI-discovered drugs are expected to have a disproportionately large therapeutic effect., Conclusions: Public-sector research has had a more immediate effect on improving public health than was previously realized.

Recent advances in cancer therapy are based on agents that specifically target the products of the genes mutated in cancer cells. Development of companion diagnostic tests for these agents can simplify the drug-discovery process, make clinical trials more efficient and informative, and be used to individualize the therapy of cancer patients. Companion diagnostic development has many challenges. Examples include the reluctance of drug companies to restrict the use of their drugs through biomarker tests, difficulties of developing companion diagnostics from discovery to clinical validation, and the regulatory challenges in developing effective mechanisms to synchronize reviews of therapeutics with diagnostic devices used to personalize treatment. This article addresses the various challenges in developing companion diagnostics along with the US FDA's approach to regulation of companion diagnostic devices.

Purpose: To assess whether the content of Scientific Advice (SA) questions addressed to a national drug regulatory agency is associated with company size. This may help to increase understanding about the knowledge, strategic, and regulatory gaps companies face during drug development., Methodology: A cross-sectional analysis was performed of SA provided by the Dutch Medicines Evaluation Board (MEB) in 2006-2008. Definition of company size was based on ranking by total revenues (Scrip's Pharmaceutical Company League Tables 2008). The content of each SA question was scored according to predefined domains (quality, nonclinical, clinical, regulatory, and product information), their subdomains (e.g., efficacy), and a selection of additional content variables (e.g., endpoints, choice of active comparator)., Results: In total, 201 SA documents including 1,087 questions could be identified. Small, medium-sized, and large companies asked for SA 110 (54.7%), 40 (19.9%), and 51 (25.4%) times, respectively. Clinical questions were asked most often (65.9%), mainly including efficacy (33.2%) and safety questions (24.0%). The most frequent topics were overall efficacy and safety strategy. Small companies asked quality and nonclinical questions more often (P < 0.001) and clinical questions less frequently than large companies (P = 0.004). Small companies asked significantly more clinical questions about pharmacokinetics, including bioequivalence, than medium-sized and large companies (P < 0.001)., Conclusion: The array of topics addressed in SA provides an interesting outlook on what industry considers to be still unresolved in drug development and worthwhile to discuss with regulators. Company size is associated with the content of SA questions. MEB advice accommodates both innovative and noninnovative drug development.

A survey in 2000 revealed that only about 30% of the prescriptions in the European pediatric population were on the basis of evidence-based medicine (EbM). Less for radiopharmaceuticals and principally for diagnostics, radiologists throughout Europe are referred to the pediatric guidelines of the European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM), as none of the frequently used tracers have been evaluated in clinical trials in the different pediatric subgroups. Following a resolution to address the lack of EbM in children, the European Commission published the Pediatric Regulation EC 1901/2006 and its amendment EC 1902/2006, effective from 2007. This regulation foresees the development of evidence-based medicine in the pediatric population. This is effected through a set of principles like the mandatory pediatric investigation plan (PIP) to be included with the market authorization application (MAA), and the pediatric use market authorization (PUMA) for off-patent pharmaceuticals, and to a very small part radiopharmaceuticals with funding possibilities for pediatric-specific research through the 7th Framework Programme (7FP) of the European Union.

The innovation and development incentives offered by the patent system are mitigated if a substantial portion of the patent term is lost while obtaining product approval through the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The Drug Price Competition and Patent Restoration Act was enacted to return some of the lost patent term to the patentee. However, any person can petition the FDA, contending that the patentee did not act with due diligence in seeking FDA approval of the product during the regulatory review period. A successful challenge will reduce the restored term, such that the patentee is not compensated for time lost due to his own non-diligent actions. While the current due-diligence regulations provide a vague and flexible standard, earlier drafts of the regulations and FDA responses to comments provide insight as to the types of factors the FDA is likely to consider when assessing an applicant's diligence. A due-diligence petition has only been filed three times, and in none of these cases did the FDA issue a decision based on substantive diligence matters. Still, detailed examination of these petitions is also instructive in predicting the success of due-diligence challenges. Statute-imposed maximums and applicants' own incentives to act diligently may minimize the utility of the due-diligence challenges in some contexts. However, in other contexts, I propose that these petitions offer a feasible approach towards limiting pharmaceutical monopolies.

In 1984, Congress passed the Hatch-Waxman Act, a landmark statute designed both to encourage innovation by pioneer drug companies and to increase competition by generic drug companies. After its enactment, drug companies attempted to "ga the regulatory regime to their respective economic advantage. In 2003, in an effort to address these issues, FDA promulgated a final rule and Congress passed the Medicare Modernization Act, amending the Hatch-Waxman Act. This article provides a comprehensive look at the 2003 statutory and regulatory changes. First, the article analyzes the history and provisions of the original Hatch-Waxman Act and the issues that arose after its enactment. Second, the article discusses the passage of the 2003 FDA rule and the 2003 Medicare Modernization Act. Next, the article demonstrates that, although the 2003 amendments may have definitively resolved some issues, the amendments did not resolve all interpretive issues and have even led to unintended consequences. In particular, the article discusses several areas of current controversy, including the effect of patent delisting and patent expiration on 180-day exclusivity, the patent delisting counterclaim provision, the declaratory judgment action provision, patent settlement agreements, and authorized generics. Finally, the article assesses the potential for future reform of the Hatch-Waxman Act. The article concludes that maintaining the balance between innovation and competition will likely remain a daunting task for legislators and regulators in the future.

Background: Prediction and management of drug safety is a global regulatory issue. Safety-related regulatory actions (SRRAs) are taken mostly when unexpected adverse drug reactions occur. Currently, Japan is reconciled to delayed access to new drugs (ie, launch delay compared to Western countries), but may have been benefiting by free-riding on safety data accumulated in other countries prior to Japanese launch., Objective: To identify factors that are significantly associated with SRRAs, and to discuss the challenges that Japan might have to face with increasing access to new drugs., Methods: The SRRAs of 135 new drugs approved from January 2000 to December 2005 were analyzed to investigate association with launch lag, company and drug characteristics, market size, submission data, and regulatory status. SRRAs were measured in terms of the number of emergency safety information notifications and official safety instructions issued by the Japanese regulatory agency within 3 years after approval. A negative binomial distribution model was used for regression analysis., Results: Longer launch lags and presence of drugs with similar modes of action were associated with fewer SRRAs. Bridging strategy showed increased SRRAs. No significant association was observed between SRRAs and the subject number in clinical data packages. Occurrence of SRRAs was varied among development strategy, preceding products, and regional regulations., Conclusions: The occurrence of SRRAs was associated with the accumulation of both foreign and domestic postmarketing evidence rather than with clinical trial data upon launch. Considering the paradigm shift to simultaneous global drug development and filing for regulatory approval, this study indicates the importance of intensive data collection in the early postmarketing phase and use of safety information in early markets. However, even if we would be sufficiently cautious about safety risks of new drugs, a population that enjoys first-in-class drugs probably has to bear the risks.

High throughput screening (HTS) facilitates screening large numbers of compounds against a biochemical target of interest using validated biological or biophysical assays. In recent years, a significant number of drugs in clinical trails originated from HTS campaigns, validating HTS as a bona fide mechanism for hit finding. In the current drug discovery landscape, the pharmaceutical industry is embracing open innovation strategies with academia to maximize their research capabilities and to feed their drug discovery pipeline. The goals of academic research have therefore expanded from target identification and validation to probe discovery, chemical genomics, and compound library screening. This trend is reflected in the emergence of HTS centers in the public domain over the past decade, ranging in size from modestly equipped academic screening centers to well endowed Molecular Libraries Probe Centers Network (MLPCN) centers funded by the NIH Roadmap initiative. These centers facilitate a comprehensive approach to probe discovery in academia and utilize both classical and cutting-edge assay technologies for executing primary and secondary screening campaigns. The various facets of academic HTS centers as well as their implications on technology transfer and drug discovery are discussed, and a roadmap for successful drug discovery in the public domain is presented. New lead discovery against therapeutic targets, especially those involving the rare and neglected diseases, is indeed a Mount Everestonian size task, and requires diligent implementation of pharmaceutical industry's best practices for a successful outcome.

This article discusses changes in psychiatric drug development from a US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) standpoint. It first looks back at changes that have been influenced by regulatory process and then looks forward at FDA initiatives that are likely to affect psychiatric drug development in the future. FDA protects the public health by ensuring the safety and efficacy of drug products introduced into the US market. FDA works with drug sponsors during development, and, when applications are submitted, reviews the safety and efficacy data and the proposed labeling. Drug advertising and promotion and postmarketing surveillance also fall within FDA's responsibility. Among the many changes in psychiatric drug development over the past 50 years, several have been particularly influenced by FDA. Populations studied have expanded diagnostically and demographically, and approved psychiatric indications have become more focused on the clinical entities actually studied, including in some cases specific symptom domains of recognized syndromes. Trial designs have become increasingly complex and informative, and approaches to data analysis have evolved to better model the reality of clinical trials. This article addresses 2 general areas of innovation at FDA that will affect psychiatric drug development in years to come. Several programs falling under the general heading of the Critical Path Initiative, ie, biomarkers, adaptive design, end-of-phase 2A meetings, and data standards, are described. In addition, a number of important safety initiatives, including Safety First, the Sentinel Initiative, the Safe Use Initiative, and meta-analysis for safety, are discussed., (© Copyright 2010 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.)

Traditionally, medical and biostatistical experts have played a central role in ensuring validity of pharmaceutical testing. The science of pharmacometrics provides powerful approaches for supporting important drug development and regulatory decisions. Numerous case studies published by academic, industry, and US Food and Drug Administration scientists attest to the significant contribution of pharmacometrics to decision making. The economic and public health benefits of applying this discipline to clinical trials far outweigh the cost associated with its implementation. The purpose of the American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics (ASCPT) Task Force is to build on the momentum and accelerate dissemination of its impact and adoption into drug development. We describe briefly the contributions of pharmacometrics and the specific goals of the Task Force.

Advances in therapeutic strategies for Alzheimer's disease that lead to even small delays in onset and progression of the condition would significantly reduce the global burden of the disease. To effectively test compounds for Alzheimer's disease and bring therapy to individuals as early as possible there is an urgent need for collaboration between academic institutions, industry and regulatory organizations for the establishment of standards and networks for the identification and qualification of biological marker candidates. Biomarkers are needed to monitor drug safety, to identify individuals who are most likely to respond to specific treatments, to stratify presymptomatic patients and to quantify the benefits of treatments. Biomarkers that achieve these characteristics should enable objective business decisions in portfolio management and facilitate regulatory approval of new therapies.

The use of genetic information to design and guide therapies creates novel patent issues. Gene patents have been integral to the introduction of new biologics, but their role in diagnostic testing is controversial. Genotype-phenotype associations are at the heart of personalized medicine. The intellectual property rules by which these biological relationships are governed have profound implications for the growth of this field. Several cases currently before the courts may add reason and clarity to the law in this area.

Matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs) belong to a family of closely related calcium- and zinc-dependent endopeptidases involved in the degradation and remodeling of extracellular matrix (ECM) proteins that are associated with the tumorigenic processes. MMPs promote tumor invasion and metastasis, regulating host defense mechanisms and normal cell function. Thus, MMP inhibitors (MMPIs) are expected to be useful chemotherapeutic agents for the treatment of malignant cancer, osteoarthritis, and rheumatoid arthritis. A vast number of small molecular MMPIs have been developed in recent years. Although there have been considerable preclinical and clinical studies on these inhibitors, most of the effective candidates in clinical trials, however, have yielded unsatisfactory results, thus they are as yet unavailable for use as therapeutic drugs. Currently, more efforts have been directed to the design of specific inhibitors towards certain MMP family members for selective usage. This review will focus primarily on an analysis of recent developed MMPIs that have entered preclinical or clinical trials, and recently registered patents with regard to new highly selective MMPIs in USA or patent applications related to the specific inhibitors of MMPs. We also analyze the clinical failure and discuss the possible strategies to best optimize the development of these novel agents.

Application of any new biomarker to support safety-related decisions during regulated phases of drug development requires provision of a substantial data set that critically assesses analytical and biological performance of that biomarker. Such an approach enables stakeholders from industry and regulatory bodies to objectively evaluate whether superior standards of performance have been met and whether specific claims of fit-for-purpose use are supported. It is therefore important during the biomarker evaluation process that stakeholders seek agreement on which critical experiments are needed to test that a biomarker meets specific performance claims, how new biomarker and traditional comparators will be measured and how the resulting data will be merged, analyzed and interpreted.

Open-source R&D initiatives are multiplying across biomedical research. Some of them-such as public-private partnerships-have achieved notable success in bringing new drugs to market economically, whereas others reflect the pharmaceutical industry's efforts to retool its R&D model. Is open innovation the answer to the innovation crisis? This Commentary argues that although it may likely be part of the solution, significant cultural, scientific, and regulatory barriers can prevent it from delivering on its promise.

Microdosing provides a tool to enhance drug development by initiating human studies prior to Phase I studies. The purpose is to assist in the go versus no-go decision-making process and to eliminate early ineffective compounds from the drug pipeline. Selection of multiple potential leads can be performed at the clinical stage instead of in preclinical studies. The microdosing approach can be easily used for a molecularly targeted potential drug compound with a known mechanism of action. It provides useful data regarding accessibility and biodistribution that can be used in many estimations benefiting the development of the molecule. In addition, steady state and genetic investigations are becoming possible. Microdosing has a sparing effect on timelines and costs, however, the real importance is not yet known because, although it is known to be widely performed, only a few original reports have been published.

The use of natural compounds from biodiversity, as well as ethnobotanical knowledge, for the development of new drugs is the gate leading to support the conservation of natural resources in developing countries. Recent technological advances and the development of new methods are revolutionizing the screening of natural products and offer a unique opportunity to replace natural products as major source of drug leads. Over the past decades, the Brazilian government established a legislation aiming to grant patent protection in all technological fields. The Convention on Biological Diversity, an international agreement that recognizes the sovereign rights of States over their natural resources, and the Brazilian legislation (Decreto n degree 2186-12/01) set for legislative, administrative or policy measures regarding the share of research and product development benefits could be the key for progress in issues related to rational employment of the Brazilian biodiversity and economy, but are far from being effective. Based on literature review, this article provides a brief description of the Brazilian legislation policy regarding intellectual property and biodiversity access, places natural drug discovery in context, analyzes patent cases and highlights critical key issues responsible for the drawback of the whole process that has a direct impact on industrial and research development, nature protection and benefit share with our society.

Rare diseases attract very little interest for drug development. To create more favourable conditions, incentives for development (scientific advice, research grants) and marketing of medicines (market exclusivity, regulatory fee reductions) are offered by several orphan legislations. These incentives have proven to be a valuable stimulus for research and development for new products for treatment, prevention and diagnosis of rare diseases. In the US almost 2000 products have been designated as orphan medicines and about 340 have received marketing authorisation. Rare diseases have also gained attention from regulators in the last years. Nowadays it is acknowledged that rare diseases deserve specific attention and individual regulatory guidance. Also, regulatory authorities have developed different mechanisms to put products on the market considering specific limitations of data availability (conditional marketing authorisation, exceptional circumstances authorisation). In the future more initiatives will have to address the need for networking scientific knowledge and research capabilities to address the difficulties to generate data in rare diseases.

Over the last decade, improvements in cancer therapies have prolonged the lives of cancer patients. Despite dramatic advances in imaging technology, surgical techniques, and adjuvant radio- and chemotherapy, the overall prognosis of this disease remains dismal. In light of this, there is an urgent need for the development of more effective therapies that can target residual disseminated tumor burden. Given the heterogeneity of tumors in general, no one strategy is likely to provide a satisfactory treatment regimen. Until the middle of the 20th century, medical treatments were limited to options like drugs, surgery, antibiotics, and radiation, but in the last years stem cells, due to their pathotropism, have become particularly attractive candidates not only to replace damaged tissue in degenerative pathologies, but also to deliver therapeutic molecules in patients with disseminated metastatic cancer. Worldwide there have been over 2000 patent applications involving human and non-human stem cells, of which one quarter refer to embryonic stem cells. Over one third of all stem cell applications and one quarter of all embryonic stem cell applications have been granted. The aim of this review is primarily to focus on the recent development of stem cell patents in cancer treatments.

Many facets of drug discovery involve the use of patented materials and methods, subjecting the researcher to potential liability from infringement of the underlying patents. Enacted in 1984, the Hatch-Waxman Act established a “safe harbor” for activities that would otherwise constitute infringement of a patented invention, if those activities were “solely for uses reasonably related to the development and submission of information under a Federal law which regulates the manufacture, use, or sale of drugs or veterinary biological products”. This article examines the major court decisions interpreting the scope of the safe harbor and their application to various activities in drug development.

Drug interaction studies on new drug applications (NDAs) for new molecular entities (NMEs) approved in Japan between 1997 and 2008 are examined in the Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency (PMDA). The situations of drug interaction studies in NDAs have changed over the past 12 years, especially in metabolizing enzyme and transporter-based drug interactions. Materials and approaches to study drug-metabolizing enzyme-based drug interactions have improved, and become more rational based on mechanistic theory and new technologies. On the basis of incremental evidence of transporter roles in human pharmacokinetics, transporter-based drug interactions have been increasingly studied during drug development and submitted in recent NDAs. Some recently approved NMEs include transporter-based drug interaction information in their package inserts (PIs). The regulatory document "Methods of Drug Interaction Studies," in addition to recent advances in science and technology, has also contributed to plan and evaluation of drug interaction studies in recent new drug development. This review summarizes current situations and further discussion points on drug interaction studies in NDAs in Japan.

Product life cycle management, which necessarily utilizes a multi-disciplinary approach, is an essential tool for companies that develop or market therapeutic monoclonal antibodies (mAbs). Too little attention to such a plan, or use of the wrong resources, could substantially curtail a product's life span. The most difficult part of the therapeutic antibody business is the development of high-quality, safe and effective products. Great care should thus be taken to ensure that products with these characteristics are positioned in a marketplace that is competition-free for as long as possible. In an era of mAbs with billion dollar markets, the loss of even a single day of sales could cost companies millions of dollars in lost revenue.