We think you have liked this presentation. If you wish to download it, please recommend it to your friends in any social system. Share buttons are a little bit lower. Thank you!
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byJessie Andrews
Modified over 2 years ago
Princeton, June 2004 © Risk Management Resources 1 The Risk Management Initiatives and Drug Development Felix M Arellano, MD, Dip Pharm Med, FISPE
2Princeton, June 2004© Risk Management Resources Definitions. Pharmacovigilance Plan (PVP) All products launched with PVP Data from pre-clinical development Data from pre-clinical development Data from clinical development Data from clinical development Class or “family” safety “issues” Class or “family” safety “issues” Data from population intended to receive the agent Data from population intended to receive the agent Steps needed to gain further knowledge Steps needed to gain further knowledge PVP (ICH) = PV Specification + Action Plan
3Princeton, June 2004© Risk Management Resources Risk Minimization Action Plan (formerly Risk Management Plan) RMP. Similar to PVP + Risk assessment/measurement Risk assessment/measurement Risk confrontation Risk confrontation Risk intervention (minimization or tools) Risk intervention (minimization or tools) Risk management evaluation Risk management evaluation Risk communication Risk communication RM (FDA) = Risk assessment + risk minimization
4Princeton, June 2004© Risk Management Resources Risk Management
5Princeton, June 2004© Risk Management Resources Where we are FDA PDUFA III. Pre NDA meeting packages should include safety information and proposal for Risk Management Plans (RMP) Pre NDA meeting packages should include safety information and proposal for Risk Management Plans (RMP) NDA Review. RMP must be submitted no later than one month prior to official action date NDA Review. RMP must be submitted no later than one month prior to official action date Guidance Papers. 2 nd draft released on May 5 th and is open for comments Guidance Papers. 2 nd draft released on May 5 th and is open for comments Implementation expected in 2004
6Princeton, June 2004© Risk Management Resources Where we are (cont.) EMEA. EU Heads of Agencies developed a “EU Risk Management Strategy” in January 2003 Guidance on Risk Management can be obtained during “scientific advice” Guidance on Risk Management can be obtained during “scientific advice” By the time of approval all products are expected to have a RMP or a statement that no specific “safety measure” is needed By the time of approval all products are expected to have a RMP or a statement that no specific “safety measure” is needed
7Princeton, June 2004© Risk Management Resources Where we are (cont.) ICH Guideline (E2E) has been adopted by FDA FDA will issue its guidelines in 2004
8Princeton, June 2004© Risk Management Resources Where we are (cont.) RM concept has shifted RMP were originally designed to manage KNOWN risks (terfenadine, mebefranil, astemizole, bromfenac)
9Princeton, June 2004© Risk Management Resources Where we are (cont.) RM concept now involves pre-marketing risk assessment during which, by definition, post-marketing risks are not known
10Princeton, June 2004© Risk Management Resources Why is RM here? Perception vs. Reality General perception of an “increased regulatory pressure”: There are less regulatory approvals There are less regulatory approvals More drugs are withdrawn More drugs are withdrawn Agencies are more cautious in granting approvals Agencies are more cautious in granting approvals
11Princeton, June 2004© Risk Management Resources Average Number of Drugs Approved per Year. FDA 1939-2000 DecadeNo. Drugs 1940s3 1950s10 1960s11 1970s17 1980s28 1990s41
12Princeton, June 2004© Risk Management Resources Last 5 years of the 20 th Century (FDA) Almost a drug per week!!!
13Princeton, June 2004© Risk Management Resources Number of NME/NDA Approved per Calendar Year 1990-2002 NDA Standard NME Expedited NME
14Princeton, June 2004© Risk Management Resources Number of NMEs Withdrawn as a Percentage of NME Approved 1990-2002 Number Proportion
15Princeton, June 2004© Risk Management Resources Proportion of Standard NDA Approved 1993-2002
16Princeton, June 2004© Risk Management Resources Proportion of Standard NDA Approved 1993-2002 1998-2002 1993-1997
17Princeton, June 2004© Risk Management Resources Number of Drug Safety Alerts (1996-2001) clinical alert of SAEs, black box warnings, voluntary recalls, counterfeits and market withdrawals CAGR 18% 1996 2001
18Princeton, June 2004© Risk Management Resources Number of Safety – Related Label Changes (1997-2001) CAGR 21% Flat after 1997 – 1998 Skepticism over effectiveness of label changes as RM tool 1997 2001
19Princeton, June 2004© Risk Management Resources Why is RM here? Perception vs. Reality General Perception of an increased regulatory pressure: There are less regulatory approvals +/- There are less regulatory approvals +/- More drugs are withdrawn + More drugs are withdrawn + Agencies are more cautious in granting approvals + Agencies are more cautious in granting approvals + Overall increase in regulatory pressure over label changes ++ Overall increase in regulatory pressure over label changes ++
20Princeton, June 2004© Risk Management Resources Why do companies need RM? It is the right thing to do It is here, whether you like it or not R & D reasons: R & D reasons: Leaner Pipelines Leaner Pipelines Less “unmet medical needs” Less “unmet medical needs” Narrower indications Narrower indications Higher R & D Costs Higher R & D Costs
21Princeton, June 2004© Risk Management Resources Why do companies need RM? (cont) Regulatory Reasons Agencies (and society) are becoming increasingly risk-averse Agencies (and society) are becoming increasingly risk-averse Smaller benefits; make benefit: risk analysis challenging Smaller benefits; make benefit: risk analysis challenging “Err on caution” translates in restrictions, delays, withdrawals (or all the above) = lower revenues “Err on caution” translates in restrictions, delays, withdrawals (or all the above) = lower revenues Opportunity is to translate challenge to advantage
22Princeton, June 2004© Risk Management Resources What to Expect Compliance must be a given Focus on life cycle management Peri-launch and post-marketing periods are simply part of a continuum Peri-launch and post-marketing periods are simply part of a continuum Sponsors cannot be expected to predict completely the safety profile… But they will be expected to follow up on the identified ones, and… But they will be expected to follow up on the identified ones, and… Actively look for new ones Actively look for new ones
23Princeton, June 2004© Risk Management Resources PVP/RMP in Development Pharmacovigilance Plans (PVP) starting in exploratory development and being followed through development
24Princeton, June 2004© Risk Management Resources Risk Communication Of all the components of the RMP this is the most complex, multidisciplinary and challenging Balance between adequate, and exaggerated Communication of risk falls on underlying perceptions of the receiver
25Princeton, June 2004© Risk Management Resources
26Princeton, June 2004© Risk Management Resources Risk Communication
27Princeton, June 2004© Risk Management Resources Issues Monumental task impossible to tackle pleasing everyone Categorization of drugs was removed from new version Risk minimization, not avoidance. Risk reduction better Endorses RM as part of life-cycle Endorsees and guides on RM in pre and post-marketing
28Princeton, June 2004© Risk Management Resources Issues. Cons Lack of precision regarding when to prepare PVP and RMAP as well as “routine PV” Confusion around whether RM will narrow exposure to drugs Older drug issue not tackled Avoiding need for PVP Contradiction with ICH E2E (endorsed by FDA) Label as risk communication tool and cornerstone Exclusion of industry from certain forums
29Princeton, June 2004© Risk Management Resources Issues Will companies take RM seriously without clear guidelines? Precedents are not reassuring Precedents are not reassuring Traditionally, pharmacovigilance is considered an expense, not an investment
30Princeton, June 2004© Risk Management Resources Issues Distribution of burden among society members Including patients, and its “informed” consent
31Princeton, June 2004© Risk Management Resources Issues (cont) Implementation of RM concept cannot be harmonized Information overload Not a panacea. E.g. toxicity in elderly due to misadministration
32Princeton, June 2004© Risk Management Resources THANK YOU
33Princeton, June 2004© Risk Management Resources 4 Oak Lane Califon, NJ 07830, USA +1.908.832.5550 www.riskmr.com email@example.com www.riskmr.com
1 Public Workshop on Risk Management Day 2 – Risk Management Programs Washington DC, April 10 International Society for Pharmacoepidemiology S. Pérez-Gutthann,
Mary Ellen Turner MD, MPH Vice-President
12/4/031 Drug Safety and Risk Management Advisory Committee Advancing the Science of Proprietary Drug Name Review Paul J. Seligman, MD.
Reproductive Health Drugs, Pregnancy Labeling Subcommittee Meeting March 28-29, 2000 Holli A. Hamilton, M.D., M.P.H. Pregnancy Labeling Team Office of.
July 15, Postmarketing Safety Evaluation of Approved Drugs and Risk Management Victor F. C. Raczkowski, MD, MS Director, Office of Drug Safety July.
Geriatric Medicines Strategy - Informal PhVWP Oct EMA Geriatric Medicines Strategy: focus on Pharmacovigilance Francesca Cerreta EMA, H-SE-CNS.
06/05/2015 Risk Management Plan 24. April 2008 Helge Gydesen Epidemiology Novo Nordisk A/S.
July 2015 PRABHAVATHI FERNANDES, PhD Founder, President and CEO How the PATH Act Can Rejuvenate Antibiotic R & D.
Risk Management Strategy for the Pharma and Biotech Product Lifecycle : New Regulatory and Legal Focus and Approach Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, LLP August.
Investigational Drugs in the hospital. + What is Investigational Drug? Investigational or experimental drugs are new drugs that have not yet been approved.
Proposal for End-of-Phase 2A (EOP2A) Meetings Advisory Committee for Pharmaceutical Sciences Clinical Pharmacology Subcommittee November 17-18, 2003 Lawrence.
General Regulatory Issues in the Development of Drugs Intended for Treatment of Chronic Illness Sharon Hertz, M.D. Medical Officer Division of Anesthetic,
Investigational New Drug Application (IND)
Postmarketing Pharmacovigilance English D. Willis, MD Clinical Risk Management Merck Research Laboratories June 1, 2012.
Objectives Why we need DHCPL Situations that call for a DHCPL Definitions DHCPL itself–content, presentation, process Target audience Current and future.
27 June 2000Victor F. C. Raczkowski, M.D.1 Risk-Management Options Victor F. C. Raczkowski, M.D., M.S. Gastrointestinal Drugs Advisory Committee 27 June.
ICH V1 An FDA Update Min Chen, M.S., RPh Office of Drug Safety Center for Drug Evaluation and Research FDA January 21, 2003.
GLOBAL REGULATORY STRATEGY CONSIDERATIONS SCIENTIFIC SARAH POWELL EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, REGULATORY STRATEGIES SEPTEMBER 14-17, 2008 BOSTON, MA.
1 Operation of the Prescription Drug User Fee Program Janet Woodcock, M.D. Deputy Commissioner for Operations November 14, 2005.
Changes without Prior Approval Breakout Session Summary Rick Smith Aventis Pasteur, Inc.
1 PRIORITY MEDICINES FOR EUROPE AND THE WORLD Barriers to Pharmaceutical Innovation Richard Laing EDM/PAR WHO.
FDA DRUG APPROVAL FDA’s Lengthy Drug Approval Process in Twelve Steps Overview of the FDA Drug Approval Process Drug Developed June 13, 2016 | Emilia Varrone.
Regulatory Clinical Trials Clinical Trials. Clinical Trials Definition: research studies to find ways to improve health Definition: research studies to.
Eureka Pre-Clinical Investigation Animal toxicology Animal pharmacokinetics/ pharmacodynamics Clinical Investigation Phase I Safety and pharmacology Phase.
Center for Veterinary Medicine (CVM) RECALLS. 21 CFR 7.40 provides guidance on the policy, procedures, and industry responsibilities for recalls.
Prescription Drug Abuse Sharon Hertz, M.D. Medical Officer Division of Anesthetic, Critical Care and Addiction Drug Products Food and Drug Administration.
RMP: DEFINITIONS AND REGULATORY ASPECTS Marc Czarka, MD, FBCPM Managing Partner HM3A ( Market Autorisation and Access Associates )
Concept Paper #3: Risk Assessment of Observational Data Session 1: Good Pharmacovigilance Practices Linda S. Hostelley on behalf of PhRMA.
© Copyright IBM 2007DIA ERS SIAC Presentation, January 2008 The HL7 RPS and SPL Standards - A High Level View Terry Hardin Sr. IT Architect Emerging Software.
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH Working with FDA: Biological Products and Clinical Development Critical Path.
0 Version: 2/14/08 Challenges for Abuse Liability Testing from Drug Development to FDA Approval Review of FDA/Industry Dialogue Session on Abuse Liability.
Comparability Protocols Nancy Sager Associate Director, QIS-Chemistry FDA/CDER/OPS.
1 Drug Safety Oversight Board: Recent Activities FDA Science Board Advisory Committee Meeting March 31 st, 2006 Douglas C. Throckmorton, MD Deputy Director.
Developing medicines for the future and why it is challenging Angela Milne.
Industry Perspective on Challenges for Product Developers - Drugs Christine Allison, M.S., RAC Associate Regulatory Consultant, Global Regulatory Affairs.
Stages of drug development
Pharmacovigilance obligations of the Pharmaceutical companies in India
Scientific Data for Evidence- Based Drug Regulation Janet Woodcock, M.D. Director, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research Food and Drug Administration.
Workshop on conformity assessment procedures and certification of medical devices INT MARKT Kyiv, November 2011 Conformity assessment of medical.
WHO Workshop on Assessment of Bioequivalence Data Addis Ababa, 31. August – 3. September 2010 Selection of comparators Compiled by Jan Welink WHO Workshop.
Drug Submissions: Review Process Agnes V. Klein, MD Biologics and Genetic Therapies Directorate February, 2003 www/hc-sc.gc.ca/hpb-dgps/therapeut.
Cardiovascular Health Research Unit, Seattle, WA IOM recommendations on drug safety: relevance for vaccines? Bruce M Psaty, MD, PhD.
Summary: Biological Therapeutics for Rare Plasma Protein Disorders Workshop July 21, 2005 Mark Weinstein, Ph.D. Office of Blood Research and Review CBER,
Sidney M. Wolfe M.D and Sherri Shubin M.D., M.P.H. Public Citizen’s Health Research Group FDA Drug Safety and Risk Management and Dermatologic and Ophthalmic.
© Safeguarding public health Building a sustainable framework for medical devices regulation Graeme Tunbridge Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory.
Achieving and Demonstrating “Quality-by-Design” with Respect to Drug Release/dissolution Performance for Conventional or Immediate Release Solid Oral Dosage.
FDA’s Draft LDT Framework & Personalized Medicine Update
REGULATORY CHALLENGES FOR NANOMATERIALS IN PUBLIC HEALTH Driving Faster Than Our Nano-Headlights AAAS Annual Meeting February 13, 2009 Norris E. Alderson,
Good Clinical Practice GCP
Regulatory Affairs and Adaptive Designs Greg Enas, PhD, RAC Director, Endocrinology/Metabolism US Regulatory Affairs Eli Lilly and Company.
© 2017 SlidePlayer.com Inc. All rights reserved.