|
|
 |
|
FDA Report
REPORT ABSTRACT
In 2004, several high-profile drug safety cases raised
concerns about the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA)
ability to manage postmarket drug safety issues. In some
cases there have been disagreements within FDA about how
to address safety issues. In this report GAO (1)
describes FDA's organizational structure and process for
postmarket drug safety decision making, (2) assesses the
effectiveness of FDA's postmarket drug safety
decision-making process, and (3) assesses the steps FDA
is taking to improve postmarket drug safety decision
making. GAO conducted an organizational review and case
studies of four drugs with safety issues: Arava, Baycol,
Bextra, and Propulsid.
Two organizationally distinct
FDA offices, the Office of New Drugs (OND) and the
Office of Drug Safety (ODS), are involved in postmarket
drug safety activities. OND, which holds responsibility
for approving drugs, is involved in safety activities
throughout the life cycle of a drug, and it has the
decision-making responsibility to take regulatory
actions concerning the postmarket safety of drugs. OND
works closely with ODS to help it make postmarket
decisions. ODS, with a primary focus on postmarket
safety, serves primarily as a consultant to OND and does
not have independent decision-making responsibility. ODS
has been reorganized several times over the years. There
has been high turnover of ODS directors in the past 10
years, with eight different directors of the office and
its predecessors. In the four drug case studies GAO
examined, GAO observed that the postmarket safety
decision-making process was complex and iterative. FDA
lacks clear and effective processes for making decisions
about, and providing management oversight of, postmarket
safety issues. The process has been limited by a lack of
clarity about how decisions are made and about
organizational roles, insufficient oversight by
management, and data constraints. GAO observed that
there is a lack of criteria for determining what safety
actions to take and when to take them. Certain parts of
ODS's role in the process are unclear, including ODS's
participation in FDA's scientific advisory committee
meetings organized by OND. Insufficient communication
between ODS and OND has been an ongoing concern and has
hindered the decision-making process. ODS does not track
information about ongoing postmarket safety issues,
including the recommendations that ODS staff make for
safety actions. FDA faces data constraints in making
postmarket safety decisions. There are weaknesses in the
different types of data available to FDA, and FDA lacks
authority to require certain studies and has resource
limitations for obtaining data. Some of FDA's
initiatives, such as the establishment of a Drug Safety
Oversight Board, a draft policy on major postmarket
decision making, and the identification of new data
sources, may improve the postmarket safety
decision-making process, but will not address all gaps.
FDA's newly created Drug Safety Oversight Board may help
provide oversight of important, high-level safety
decisions, but it does not address the lack of
systematic tracking of ongoing safety issues. Other
initiatives, such as FDA's draft policy on major
postmarket decisions and regular meetings between OND
divisions and ODS, may help improve the clarity and
effectiveness of the process, but they are not fully
implemented. FDA has not clarified ODS's role in certain
scientific advisory committee meetings. FDA's dispute
resolution processes for disagreements about postmarket
safety decisions have not been used. FDA is taking steps
to identify additional data sources, but data
constraints remain.
Subject Terms
Product safety
Prescription drugs
Pharmacological research
Pharmaceutical industry
Drugs
Decision making
Consumer protection
Safety regulation
Safety standards
|
|
|
|