Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword
Like this
2Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Drug SafetyFDA LACKS COMPREHENSIVE DATA TO DETERMINE WHETHER RISK EVALUATION AND MITIGATION STRATEGIES IMPROVE DRUG SAFETY

Drug SafetyFDA LACKS COMPREHENSIVE DATA TO DETERMINE WHETHER RISK EVALUATION AND MITIGATION STRATEGIES IMPROVE DRUG SAFETY

Ratings: (0)|Views: 1,291 |Likes:
Published by Mass Live
FDA LACKS COMPREHENSIVE DATA
TO DETERMINE WHETHER RISK
EVALUATION AND MITIGATION
STRATEGIES IMPROVE DRUG SAFETY
FDA LACKS COMPREHENSIVE DATA
TO DETERMINE WHETHER RISK
EVALUATION AND MITIGATION
STRATEGIES IMPROVE DRUG SAFETY

More info:

Published by: Mass Live on Feb 13, 2013
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

01/05/2014

pdf

text

original

 
 
Department of Health and Human Services
OFFICE OFINSPECTOR GENERAL
FDA
 
L
 
ACKS
C
OMPREHENSIVE
D
ATA
T
O
D
ETERMINE
W
HETHER
R
ISK
E
 
VALUATION AND
M
ITIGATION
S
TRATEGIES
I
MPROVE
D
RUG
S
AFETY
Daniel R. Levinson
 Inspector GeneralFebruary 2013OEI-04-11-00510
 
 
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: FDA LACKS COMPREHENSIVE DATA TODETERMINE WHETHER REMS IMPROVE DRUG SAFETY, OEI-04-11-00510WHY WE DID THIS STUDY
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) requires manufacturers to submit structuredplans, known as Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies (REMS), for drugs associatedwith known or potential risks that may outweigh the drugs’ benefits. If FDA does notproperly monitor REMS’ performance, it cannot ensure that the public is providedmaximum protection from a drug’s known or potential risks. However, FDA does nothave the authority to require, but may request, drug manufacturers (i.e., sponsors) tosubmit specific information regarding REMS’ effectiveness.
HOW WE DID THIS STUDY
We reviewed approved REMS since program inception in 2008 through 2011 andconducted structured interviews with FDA officials about FDA’s efforts to evaluateREMS components. We also reviewed 49 sponsors’ REMS assessments and FDA’sreviews of these assessments to determine the extent to which sponsors’ assessmentswere complete, were submitted to FDA within required timeframes, and indicated thatREMS were meeting their goals. We also determined whether FDA evaluated theelements to assure safe use (ETASU) of one drug in each year of the program, asrequired by Federal law.
WHAT WE FOUND
FDA approved 199 REMS between 2008 and 2011, 99 of which were still required in2012. Nearly half of sponsor assessments for the 49 REMS we reviewed did not includeall information requested in FDA assessment plans, and 10 were not submitted to FDAwithin required timeframes. FDA determined that 7 of the 49 REMS we reviewed metall of their goals. However, FDA has not identified reliable methods to assess theeffectiveness of REMS. Finally, FDA’s assessment review times exceeded its goal of 60 days for all but one sponsor assessment, which reduces sponsors’ time to makesuggested changes before submitting subsequent assessments.
WHAT WE RECOMMEND
Our findings raise concerns about the overall effectiveness of the REMS program. Toaddress these concerns, we made seven recommendations regarding FDA’s evaluationand assessment of REMS and its review of sponsors’ REMS assessments. FDAconcurred with six of our recommendations. For the remaining recommendation, to seek legislative authority to make FDA assessment plans enforceable, FDA did not statewhether it concurred or did not concur. However, FDA agreed that this recommendationshould be considered if another opportunity arises to pursue legislative changes to thestatutory provisions that describe the requirements for REMS assessments.
 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Objectives.................................................................................................... 1Background .................................................................................................. 1Methodology .............................................................................................. 10Findings ..................................................................................................... 14FDA approved 199 REMS between 2008 and 2011, 99 of whichwere still required in 2012 ............................................................. 14Nearly half of the 49 sponsor assessments we reviewed did notinclude all information requested in FDA assessment plans, and10 were not submitted to FDA within required timeframes .......... 15FDA determined that 7 of the 49 REMS we reviewed met all of their goals ....................................................................................... 16FDA has not identified reliable methods to evaluate theeffectiveness of REMS .................................................................. 18FDAs assessment review times exceeded its 60-day goal forall but one sponsor assessment ...................................................... 20Conclusion and Recommendations............................................................ 22Agency Comments and Office of Inspector General Response .... 25Appendixes ................................................................................................ 27A: Assessment Review Memorandums Provided by FDA ........... 27B: Agency Comments ................................................................... 29Acknowledgments ..................................................................................... 34

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->