Cargando…

Regulatory withdrawal of medicines marketed with uncertain benefits: the bevacizumab case study

BACKGROUND: Withdrawal of conditional regulatory approval or subsidization of new medicines when subsequent evidence does not confirm early trial results may not be well understood or accepted by the public. OBJECTIVES: We present a case study of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)’s decision...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Vitry, Agnes, Nguyen, Tuan, Entwistle, Vikky, Roughead, Elizabeth
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4610052/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26483954
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40545-015-0046-2
_version_ 1782395892352942080
author Vitry, Agnes
Nguyen, Tuan
Entwistle, Vikky
Roughead, Elizabeth
author_facet Vitry, Agnes
Nguyen, Tuan
Entwistle, Vikky
Roughead, Elizabeth
author_sort Vitry, Agnes
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Withdrawal of conditional regulatory approval or subsidization of new medicines when subsequent evidence does not confirm early trial results may not be well understood or accepted by the public. OBJECTIVES: We present a case study of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)’s decision to withdraw the indication of bevacizumab for the treatment of advanced breast cancer and include an analysis of the reactions of stakeholders with a view to identifying opportunities for improving risk management for new medicines with conditional approval or funding. METHODS: We drew on a range of information sources, including FDA documents, medical journals and media reports, to describe the evidentiary basis of the FDA decisions. We analysed the reactions and perspectives of the stakeholders. RESULTS: In 2008 bevacizumab was granted conditional approval for treatment of advanced breast cancer by the FDA pending submission of supplementary satisfactory evidence. In 2011 the FDA decision to withdraw the indication was met with a hostile reaction from many clinicians and cancer survivors. There were different interpretations of the therapeutic value of bevacizumab with strong beliefs among cancer survivors that the medicine was effective and potential harm was manageable. High expectations of the public may have been encouraged by overly positive media reports and limited understanding by the public of the complexity of the scientific evaluation of new medicines and of the regulatory processes. CONCLUSIONS: Improving understanding and acceptance of approval or coverage schemes conditional to evidence development may require the development of risk management plans by regulatory and funding institutions. They may include a range of strategies such as requirements for formal patient acknowledgment of the conditional availability of the medicine, ‘black-triangle’ equivalent labels that identify full approval is based on pending evidence, and ongoing communication with the media, public and health professionals.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4610052
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-46100522015-10-20 Regulatory withdrawal of medicines marketed with uncertain benefits: the bevacizumab case study Vitry, Agnes Nguyen, Tuan Entwistle, Vikky Roughead, Elizabeth J Pharm Policy Pract Research BACKGROUND: Withdrawal of conditional regulatory approval or subsidization of new medicines when subsequent evidence does not confirm early trial results may not be well understood or accepted by the public. OBJECTIVES: We present a case study of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)’s decision to withdraw the indication of bevacizumab for the treatment of advanced breast cancer and include an analysis of the reactions of stakeholders with a view to identifying opportunities for improving risk management for new medicines with conditional approval or funding. METHODS: We drew on a range of information sources, including FDA documents, medical journals and media reports, to describe the evidentiary basis of the FDA decisions. We analysed the reactions and perspectives of the stakeholders. RESULTS: In 2008 bevacizumab was granted conditional approval for treatment of advanced breast cancer by the FDA pending submission of supplementary satisfactory evidence. In 2011 the FDA decision to withdraw the indication was met with a hostile reaction from many clinicians and cancer survivors. There were different interpretations of the therapeutic value of bevacizumab with strong beliefs among cancer survivors that the medicine was effective and potential harm was manageable. High expectations of the public may have been encouraged by overly positive media reports and limited understanding by the public of the complexity of the scientific evaluation of new medicines and of the regulatory processes. CONCLUSIONS: Improving understanding and acceptance of approval or coverage schemes conditional to evidence development may require the development of risk management plans by regulatory and funding institutions. They may include a range of strategies such as requirements for formal patient acknowledgment of the conditional availability of the medicine, ‘black-triangle’ equivalent labels that identify full approval is based on pending evidence, and ongoing communication with the media, public and health professionals. BioMed Central 2015-10-19 /pmc/articles/PMC4610052/ /pubmed/26483954 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40545-015-0046-2 Text en © Vitry et al. 2015 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Vitry, Agnes
Nguyen, Tuan
Entwistle, Vikky
Roughead, Elizabeth
Regulatory withdrawal of medicines marketed with uncertain benefits: the bevacizumab case study
title Regulatory withdrawal of medicines marketed with uncertain benefits: the bevacizumab case study
title_full Regulatory withdrawal of medicines marketed with uncertain benefits: the bevacizumab case study
title_fullStr Regulatory withdrawal of medicines marketed with uncertain benefits: the bevacizumab case study
title_full_unstemmed Regulatory withdrawal of medicines marketed with uncertain benefits: the bevacizumab case study
title_short Regulatory withdrawal of medicines marketed with uncertain benefits: the bevacizumab case study
title_sort regulatory withdrawal of medicines marketed with uncertain benefits: the bevacizumab case study
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4610052/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26483954
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40545-015-0046-2
work_keys_str_mv AT vitryagnes regulatorywithdrawalofmedicinesmarketedwithuncertainbenefitsthebevacizumabcasestudy
AT nguyentuan regulatorywithdrawalofmedicinesmarketedwithuncertainbenefitsthebevacizumabcasestudy
AT entwistlevikky regulatorywithdrawalofmedicinesmarketedwithuncertainbenefitsthebevacizumabcasestudy
AT rougheadelizabeth regulatorywithdrawalofmedicinesmarketedwithuncertainbenefitsthebevacizumabcasestudy