Lilly CEO Calls on FDA to Lighten Up
The FDA has to speed up adoption of a “Benefit-Risk Framework” to improve decision-making in the regulatory process, said John Lechleiter, Ph.D., chairman, president and CEO of Eli Lilly and Company.
Speaking at recent industry conference, the CEO of the drug giant called for a regulatory process that focuses both on recognizing and appreciating benefits while identifying and minimizing risks. Such a balanced approach would help increase the flow of needed medicines to patients and reverse a trend of fewer new drugs getting approved, he said.
“The stakes are high,” Lechleiter said. “The only way to make inroads against [chronic and other] diseases is to sustain the pace of medical progress.”
The FDA appears to be a bit on the defensive here. It recently issued a report touting its record approving drugs it says demonstrates it isn’t stifling innovation at all thank you very much.
The backdrop to this battle is the upcoming reauthorization of the Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA) V. Originally enacted in 1992, PDUFA and its iterations set the foundation for how FDA will manage the drug review process for five years, beginning in October 2012.
Lilly’s Lechleiter stressed the importance of a non-partisan course for reauthorization. “As a basis for the drug review process, PDUFA is too important to get bogged down in partisan politics,” Lechleiter said. “As Congress considers reauthorization next year, we hope to see a ‘clean’ bill – one free of extraneous and controversial provisions that would politicize the bill and further complicate matters for all parties.”Lechleiter said the regulatory system must continue to evolve to meet 21st century needs.
Lechleiter offered five key characteristics of a “state of the art” regulatory approval system:
- Timely – “There are far too many conditions for which therapy is inadequate or nonexistent. We need a system that is not only effective, but efficient as well.”
- Predictable – “The system must be predictable in its judgments, its decisions, and the criteria on which those decisions were based – whether scientific, ethical, legal, etc.”
- Consistent – “The system must be consistent across review divisions using standardization and repeatable processes – so that an innovator clearly understands the regulatory requirements and so that institutional learning can be harnessed to replace time-consuming one-off learning by review groups and division.”
- Transparent – “The system needs to be transparent in its judgments and criteria so [stakeholders] understand the rationale for its decisions.”
- Scientifically rigorous – “This requires scientific expertise within the agency – or access to the expertise – that understands, engages in, and influences the constantly evolving external scientific environment and ensures that standards are up-to-date.”
Lechleiter also discussed ways to strengthen a medicine’s benefit and lower its risk, including calling for greater emphasis on improved outcomes for individual patients, through the development of tailored therapeutics.
“From the point of view of patients and their doctors, a tailored therapy will provide a better benefit/risk trade-off, because they can have a higher degree of confidence that it will work effectively and with minimal harmful side-effects relative to the benefit obtained,” said Lechleiter. “From a value-for-money standpoint, tailored medicines should also reduce the heavy costs associated with non-responders. In other words, payers will get what they are paying for.”
Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war. This one isn’t over by a long-shot.